UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases3Decisions4Judges4Parties2Firms
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 principleinvalidity attack based on Art. 138(1)(e) EPC inadmissible under applicable national lawClear all

Filtering to principle: invalidity attack based on Art. 138(1)(e) EPC inadmissible under applicable national law

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
problem-solution approach to inventive step under epo case law applied by upc110%
invalidity attack based on art. 138(1)(e) epc inadmissible under applicable national law110%
security for costs for us-based non-practicing entity under r. 158 rop110%
us bank guarantee not adequate security; deposit required110%
late-filed prior art documents admissible in response to auxiliary requests110%
cancellation of second oral hearing upon finding all forms of patent invalid110%
Most-rejected arguments
Arguments that the UPC has not accepted, ranked by repeat occurrences across cases.
ArgumentPartyCases
the patent as amended (auxiliary requests ar1-ar1-24) should be maintained as validClaimant1
security for costs should be set at no more than eur 100,000 and may be provided by a us bank guaranteeClaimant1
the written witness statement of dr. raleigh qualifies as a full witness statement under r. 175 ropClaimant1
Most-cited prior art
References relied on across substantive merits cases, with the role they typically play.
ReferencePredominant roleCases
ZP8-ZP9 (late-filed documents admitted in response to AR1-24)Obviousness combination1