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 Settled, withdrawn, and procedural-only outcomes excluded from the denominator.
100%patentees prevail on the merits
1 merits decision; 4 inconclusive cases excluded (small sample)
1 won · 0 lost · Insufficient prior-period data
Win rate by year
Patentee win rate by year of first decision.
- 2024: 100% (1/1)
Win rate by division
Top divisions by merits-decision volume.
- Dusseldorf LD100%(n=1)
PI grant rate
60%
3 granted · 2 denied · 5 total decisions
PI grant rate (conservative)
60%
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 interim, withdrawn)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Settled / withdrawn / dismissed as a share of all non-pending outcomes.
0% 0 / 5
Outcomes by category (detailed)
Stacked breakdown using sharper outcome enums — revocation cases split into revoked_full / revoked_partial / maintained_as_*, etc.
By technology sector
Top sectors by case count (filter scope applied).
By case category
How outcome rates differ across the six L2 buckets.
- Provisional measures8
- Infringement5
By division
PI grant rate · infringement rate · revocation rate per division (within scope).
- Dusseldorf LD13 casesPI grant rate: 60%Infringement rate: 100%Revocation rate: —
Recent decisions
Most recent decisions in scope.
- 2026-02-25UPC_CFI_692/2026Dusseldorf LDPI grantedDüsseldorf Local Division granted provisional measures (preliminary injunction) against Yaham Recience Technology for infringement of EP 3 757 442 B1 (LED display module for temporary exhibition stands). The order was issued ex parte during the EuroShop trade fair in Düsseldorf, with penalty payments ordered for non-compliance and provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 400,000.
- 2026-02-12UPC_CFI_723/2025Dusseldorf LDPI grantedDüsseldorf Local Division granted provisional measures (preliminary injunction) against Angelalign defendants 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 for infringement of EP 4 346 690 B1 (dental aligner technology), with penalty payments of up to EUR 10,000 per infringing product or EUR 20,000 per day for continuing infringement, and provisional cost reimbursement of EUR 400,000. The application against defendant 3 (Angelalign Technology Inc., Cayman Islands holding company) was rejected as no actions beyond typical shareholder role were alleged.
- 2025-12-29UPC_CFI_723/2025Dusseldorf LDPI deniedThe Düsseldorf Local Division dismissed Align Technology's application for a preliminary injunction against Angelalign entities concerning dental aligner patent EP 4 346 690, and addressed a request for leave to appeal the order.
- 2025-11-12UPC_CFI_837/2024Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division panel dismissed the defendants' application under R. 333.1 RoP to review the judge-rapporteur's order refusing to extend deadlines for filing rejoinder and related submissions in the American Wave Machines v. Surftown wave-machine patent case.
- 2025-11-06UPC_CFI_723/2025Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyDüsseldorf Local Division procedural order in Align Technology's application for provisional measures against Angelalign. The order addresses Angelalign's request for security for costs under R. 158.1 RoP based on Align Technology's US domicile and assesses whether enforcement of a cost order would be unduly burdensome. This order was issued before the final provisional measures order of 12 February 2026.
- 2025-08-21ACT_13359/2024Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyProcedural order in infringement proceedings by Hartmann Packaging A/S against Omni-Pac entities (Düsseldorf Local Division) concerning EP 2 755 901 B1 (egg packaging). The order closes the interim procedure, provides the panel's preliminary view on the skilled person definition and provides the parties with feature analyses for claims 1, 5 and 6. Claimant cautioned about potential indefiniteness of its recall request and corrected the basis for preliminary damages. Parties given deadline until 28 August 2025 for uploads before oral hearing.
- 2025-06-10UPC_APP_26391/2025Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyThe Düsseldorf Local Division granted Aesculap AG's request for simultaneous interpretation at the oral hearing in preliminary injunction proceedings against Shanghai International Holding Corporation GmbH concerning EP 2 892 442 B1, and permitted video conference participation.
- 2025-05-02ACT_15774/2024Dusseldorf LDProcedural onlyInterim procedure closure order in 10x Genomics, Inc. v. Curio Bioscience Inc. at Düsseldorf Local Division (EP 2 697 391 B1). Directions for the oral hearing were issued including: (1) translation of claim motions into English; (2) guidance on publication/media order requirements (Art. 80 UPCA); (3) clarification of 'such as' wording in supporting documents request; (4) parties to submit cost estimates (R. 104(k) RoP); (5) parties may upload hearing aids. Interim procedure closed.