ENDE

Account

Analytics 1Cases 2Decisions 4Judges 5Parties 2Firms

Filters

Case number

Patent number

Filing date

→

Decision date

→

Division

Language

Category

Subcategory

Substantive (main) cases only

Proceeding type

Action type

Status

Outcome

Outcome detail

Motion type

Settlement timing

Technology (L1)

Technology sector

CPC code

SEP / FRAND

Judge

Claimant

Respondent

Firm

Corporate group

Entity type

Has security order

Security status

Legal principle

Burden of proof for patent invalidity in PI proceedings rests on respondent

Cites UPC case

Cites authority

Had oral hearing

Filters

Case number

Patent number

Filing date

→

Decision date

→

Division

Language

Category

Subcategory

Substantive (main) cases only

Proceeding type

Action type

Status

Outcome

Outcome detail

Motion type

Settlement timing

Technology (L1)

Technology sector

CPC code

SEP / FRAND

Judge

Claimant

Respondent

Firm

Corporate group

Entity type

Has security order

Security status

Legal principle

Burden of proof for patent invalidity in PI proceedings rests on respondent

Cites UPC case

Cites authority

Had oral hearing

Firm scorecards

Activity, side mix, division specialization, top clients.

Legal principleBurden of proof for patent invalidity in PI proceedings rests on respondent Clear all

Top firms in scope

Click a firm name for their profile. Counts are case-level — a firm appearing on both sides of one case counts once per side.

Firm	Cases	Claimant-side	Respondent-side	Attorneys	Top divisions
Carpmaels & Ransford	1	1	0	2	Paris LD (1)
Bristows (Ireland) LLP	1	0	1	3	Paris LD (1)