UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases2Decisions4Judges5Parties0Firms
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 principleprior art must be in same technical field or one skilled person would consult for the problem posedClear all

Filtering to principle: prior art must be in same technical field or one skilled person would consult for the problem posed

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
intermediate generalisation as inadmissible extension under art. 123(2) and (3) epc110%
prior art must be in same technical field or one skilled person would consult for the problem posed110%
novelty and inventive step under art. 54 and 56 epc110%
auxiliary requests admissible even if numerous where their core is small110%
patent partially revoked and maintained in amended form (auxiliary requests 1 and 2)110%
Most-rejected arguments
Arguments that the UPC has not accepted, ranked by repeat occurrences across cases.
ArgumentPartyCases
patent as granted is valid and infringed by xiaomi's wireless charging productsClaimant1
number of auxiliary requests is unduly burdensome on defendantsRespondent1
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.