UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases1Decisions3Judges4Parties1Firms
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 principleThree-month delay without significant clarification steps defeats urgencyClear all

Filtering to principle: Three-month delay without significant clarification steps defeats urgency

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
urgency for pi requires prompt investigation upon knowledge of infringement110%
three-month delay without significant clarification steps defeats urgency110%
doctrine of equivalents: assessment focuses on how the technical effect is achieved, not merely that an effect is produced110%
description passage identifying acceleration as 'additional' to sound sensing precludes treating acceleration as an equivalent alternative110%
costs of protective letter are 'other costs' of proceedings under art. 69(1) upca110%
Most-rejected arguments
Arguments that the UPC has not accepted, ranked by repeat occurrences across cases.
ArgumentPartyCases
connected ball technology infringes the patent by using sensor data to determine ball contactClaimant1
infringement by equivalents — accelerometer processing equivalent to sound-signal comparisonClaimant1
auxiliary requests based on amended claims (adding acceleration sensing) establish infringementClaimant1
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.