Outcome base rates
What's normal — PI grant rate, infringement rate, revocation rate, settlement rate. Honest denominators using motion type.
Patentee win rate
Share of merits decisions where the patentee prevailed — infringement cases finding infringement, revocation cases upholding the patent. Settled, withdrawn, and procedural-only outcomes excluded from the denominator.
50%patentees prevail on the merits
2 merits decisions; 14 inconclusive cases excluded (small sample)
1 won · 1 lost · ↓ 100.0pp vs. prior 12 months
Win rate by year
Patentee win rate by year of first decision.
- 2024: 100% (1/1)
- 2026: 0% (0/1)
Win rate by division
Top divisions by merits-decision volume.
- Nordic-Baltic RD100%(n=1)
- The Hague LD0%(n=1)
When patentees lose, why?
Of 1 loss…
100%
Patent invalidated — 1 (100%)No infringement found — 0 (0%)
PI grant rate
50%
2 granted · 2 denied · 4 total decisions
PI grant rate (conservative)
50%
Granted / total PI decisions (incl. interim, withdrawn)
Infringement rate
100%
1 infringed · 0 not infringed
Revocation rate
—
Settlement / withdrawal rate
Settled / withdrawn / dismissed as a share of all non-pending outcomes.
64% 9 / 14
Outcomes by category (detailed)
Stacked breakdown using sharper outcome enums — revocation cases split into revoked_full / revoked_partial / maintained_as_*, etc.
Settlement timing
When settled or withdrawn cases actually closed — relative to procedural milestones.
By technology sector
Top sectors by case count (filter scope applied).
By case category
How outcome rates differ across the six L2 buckets.
- Infringement42
- Revocation17
- Provisional measures9
- Other7
By division
PI grant rate · infringement rate · revocation rate per division (within scope).
- Nordic-Baltic RD21 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: 100%Revocation rate: —
- Mannheim LD15 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Hamburg LD11 casesPI grant rate: 67%Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- The Hague LD9 casesPI grant rate: 0%Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Munich LD7 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Copenhagen LD5 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Dusseldorf LD3 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Paris LD2 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Helsinki LD1 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
- Lisbon LD1 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
Recent decisions
Most recent decisions in scope.
- 2026-03-03UPC_CFI_43/2025The Hague LDRevokedThe Hague Local Division revoked Advanced Brain Monitoring's EP 2 437 696 B2 (position therapy device for sleep disorders) as lacking inventive step over JP748 prior art. The counterclaim for revocation by Philips succeeded and the infringement action was dismissed.
- 2026-02-27UPC_CFI_344/2025Mannheim LDProcedural onlyThe Mannheim Local Division (judge-rapporteur Johansson) ordered Defendant 1 (SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd.) to pay a separate court fee for its counterclaim for revocation within 14 days, ruling that the fee already paid by Defendants 2-4 for their earlier counterclaim does not cover Defendant 1's subsequently filed separate counterclaim, even if the content is the same. Failure to pay may result in a default decision under R. 355 RoP.
- 2026-02-19UPC_CFI_541/2025Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued an order on Wizart's request for security for costs under R. 158 RoP in proceedings against Leap Tools (Canada), addressing whether the claimant's Canadian domicile and financial situation justify ordering security.
- 2026-02-16UPC_CFI_716/2025Dusseldorf LDSettledDecision permitting ETRI's withdrawal of the infringement action (EP 2 258 692 B1 / EP 3 258 692 B1) against Hisense Gorenje and others following a settlement. Each party bears its own costs. 60% of court fees (EUR 14,400) reimbursed to Claimant. Value in dispute set at EUR 2,500,000.
- 2025-12-30UPC_CFI_648/2025Dusseldorf LDWithdrawnThe Düsseldorf Local Division allowed ETRI's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Shenzhen Transsion and related defendants. Each party bears its own costs; 60% of court fees were reimbursed to the claimant.
- 2025-12-23UPC_CFI_499/2025Mannheim LDWithdrawnNEC Corporation withdrew its infringement action against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. All represented defendants consented. Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented but showed no interest in proceedings. No cost compensation was sought. NEC was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP.
- 2025-12-23UPC_CFI_501/2025Mannheim LDWithdrawnNEC Corporation withdrew its infringement action concerning EP 3 057 321 against all defendants (Shenzhen Transsion Holdings and associated entities) before closure of the written procedure. All represented defendants consented. Defendant 5 (ASD SAS) was unrepresented. No cost compensation was sought. NEC was ordered a 60% reimbursement of court fees under R.370.9(b)(i) and R.370.11 RoP.
- 2025-12-10UPC_CFI_251/2025The Hague LDProcedural onlyThe Hague Local Division issued a case management order addressing Maxell's 44 conditional auxiliary requests in infringement proceedings against Samsung concerning EP 2 061 230, requesting clarification on the reasonable number of auxiliary requests per R. 30.1(c) RoP.