UPC Analytics
ENDE
Analytics1Cases1Decisions3Judges2Parties2Firms
Filing trendsOutcomesPendencyTechnologyForum strategyLeading casesLegal issuesSecurity for costs

Outcome base rates

What's normal — PI grant rate, infringement rate, revocation rate, settlement rate. Honest denominators using motion type.

Legal principleproceedings closed without cost decision where not requestedClear all
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 Settled, withdrawn, and procedural-only outcomes excluded from the denominator.

No merits decisions in the current scope.

PI grant rate
—
PI grant rate (conservative)
—
Infringement rate
—
0 infringed · 0 not infringed
Revocation rate
—
Settlement / withdrawal rate
Settled / withdrawn / dismissed as a share of all non-pending outcomes.
100% 1 / 1
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When settled or withdrawn cases actually closed — relative to procedural milestones.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.
  • Infringement1
By division
PI grant rate · infringement rate · revocation rate per division (within scope).
  • Paris CD1 casesPI grant rate: —Infringement rate: —Revocation rate: —
Recent decisions
Most recent decisions in scope.
  • 2026-03-26UPC_CFI_364/2025SettledDecision of the Paris Central Division dated 26 March 2026 declaring the counterclaim for infringement (UPC_CFI_364/2025) closed following an out-of-court settlement between Belparts Group N.V. and IMI Hydronic Engineering Deutschland GmbH. This is the counterpart order to UPC_CFI_104/2025: the counterclaim for infringement by Belparts was withdrawn simultaneously with IMI's withdrawal of its revocation action following settlement. No cost decision was requested.