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 Settled, withdrawn, and procedural-only outcomes excluded from the denominator.
25%patentees prevail on the merits
8 merits decisions; 19 inconclusive cases excluded (small sample)
2 won · 6 lost · ↓ 100.0pp vs. prior 12 months
Win rate by year
Patentee win rate by year of first decision.
- 2025: 20% (1/5)
Win rate by division
Top divisions by merits-decision volume.
- Dusseldorf LD25%(n=8)
When patentees lose, why?
Of 6 losses…
50%
50%
Patent invalidated — 3 (50%)No infringement found — 3 (50%)
PI grant rate
75%
3 granted · 1 denied · 4 total decisions
PI grant rate (conservative)
75%
Granted / total PI decisions (incl. interim, withdrawn)
Infringement rate
0%
0 infringed · 2 not infringed
Revocation rate
100%
1 revoked / partially · 0 maintained / amended
Settlement / withdrawal rate
Settled / withdrawn / dismissed as a share of all non-pending outcomes.
41% 9 / 22
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When settled or withdrawn cases actually closed — relative to procedural milestones.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.
- Infringement60
- Revocation36
- Other16
- Provisional measures14
By division
PI grant rate · infringement rate · revocation rate per division (within scope).
- Dusseldorf LD126 casesPI grant rate: 75%Infringement rate: 0%Revocation rate: 100%
Recent decisions
Most recent decisions in scope.
- 2026-02-25UPC_CFI_1927/2025Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyDüsseldorf Local Division issued a preliminary procedural order scheduling an oral hearing in the provisional measures proceedings by Ottobock against BrainPortfolio Inc. and BrainRobotics Inc. for 22 April 2026. The order set filing deadlines for the parties' written submissions in preparation for the hearing and invited parties to notify participants. This is a case management order with no substantive ruling on the merits.
- 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.
- 2026-02-11UPC_CFI_336/2024Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division issued a decision under R. 265 RoP on the withdrawal or termination of proceedings in case UPC_CFI_336/2024.
- 2026-01-28UPC_CFI_315/2024Dusseldorf LDNot infringedThe Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Labrador Diagnostics' infringement action concerning EP 3 756 767 against bioMérieux entities, finding no infringement after the Central Division amended the patent claims; the court was bound by the amended claim wording and validity was no longer decisive.
- 2026-01-15UPC_CFI_100/2024Dusseldorf LDNot infringedFinal decision on the merits in the infringement action by Ona Patents SL against Google Ireland Limited and others (EP 2 263 098 B1, Wi-Fi positioning patent). The court dismissed the infringement action, finding no direct infringement (the accused product did not possess every claimed component). The counterclaim for revocation was also dismissed (patent maintained as valid). Claimant to bear costs of the infringement action; 80% of counterclaim costs to defendants, 20% to claimant. Value in dispute: EUR 6,000,000 (infringement) and EUR 9,000,000 (counterclaim). Key headnotes: register governs proprietor standing; each component of a product must be present for direct infringement.
- 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_809/2025Paris CDProcedural onlyThe Paris Central Division ruled on a preliminary objection by Robert Bosch companies challenging its jurisdiction over an infringement action by Valeo Systèmes d'Essuyages concerning EP 2 671 766 (wiper system patent). The court upheld the objection and transferred the case to the Düsseldorf Local Division, finding that the Central Division lacked competence. The language of proceedings before the Düsseldorf Local Division was set as English.
- 2025-12-09UPC_CFI_432/2025Dusseldorf LDWithdrawnThe Düsseldorf Local Division permitted Headwater Research's withdrawal of its patent infringement action against Apple entities and the corresponding withdrawal of Apple's counterclaim for revocation of EP 3 107 243, with no costs order by agreement of the parties.