UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases1Decisions4Judges9Parties2Firms
Filing trendsOutcomesPendencyTechnologyForum strategyLeading casesLegal issuesSecurity for costs

Legal issues

Cross-cutting view of legal principles, recurring arguments, and the prior art the court relies on.

Legal principlePleading ignorance is inadmissible in UPC proceedingsClear all

Filtering to principle: Pleading ignorance is inadmissible in UPC proceedings

Clear principle filter
Most-litigated legal principles
Recurring legal principles across 1 cases with reasoning extracted. Success rate counts patentee-favorable outcomes only.
PrincipleCasesDecidedPatentee success
second medical use claims — infringement requires that the alleged infringer offers or places the product on the market in a way that leads or may lead to the claimed therapeutic use110%
second medical use claims — notional novelty under art. 54(5) epc requires a specific use in a method under art. 53(c) epc110%
inventive step — motivation to implement the claimed use may be absent or negated where many uncertainties exist110%
pleading ignorance is inadmissible in upc proceedings110%
purposive claim construction — scope of second medical use claim110%
Most-rejected arguments
Arguments that the UPC has not accepted, ranked by repeat occurrences across cases.
ArgumentPartyCases
infringement of the second medical use claim of ep 3 536 712 b1 by amgen's evolocumab product in paediatric patientsClaimant1
counterclaim for revocation of ep 3 536 712 b1Respondent1
Most-cited prior art
References relied on across substantive merits cases, with the role they typically play.

No prior-art data in the current scope.