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 principlesecurity for costs for US-based non-practicing entity under R. 158 RoPClear all

Filtering to principle: security for costs for US-based non-practicing entity under R. 158 RoP

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