Evidence gathering in two countries: what the other side does

When a patent dispute runs before courts in two countries, the other side does not wait for your response. It requests disclosure, lines up expert witnesses, and files preservation requests before your side has time to review the claim in full. Expect movement within days, not weeks, once the second filing lands.

Why the other side moves first

Cross-border patent cases rarely pause for a full statement of case before evidence starts moving. Once proceedings open in two jurisdictions, the other side typically activates both files at the same time and pushes for early disclosure in whichever forum grants it faster. Courts differ in how quickly they order document production, and a party that knows this will file where the rules favour speed, then use what it obtains there in the slower forum.

This pressure grows when the underlying invention, or the team that built it, sits across borders. Ownership records, lab notebooks and correspondence may be split between entities in different countries, and the other side will address requests to each entity separately rather than to a single point of contact. When the team is spread across three countries explained covers how attribution questions complicate this stage further, since a request for evidence often doubles as a probe into who actually controls it.

The other side's aim is straightforward: lock in a favourable record before your side organises a coordinated response. That is why requests for technical documents, internal correspondence and prototypes go out almost immediately, often before your local counsel in one of the two countries has even been formally instructed.

What the other side typically does

The sequence below reflects common practice rather than a fixed rule. Exact timing depends on the forum and on the case management order issued at the first hearing, not on a general standard.

Stage	What the other side typically does	What this means for you
Opening	Files parallel disclosure requests in both jurisdictions within days of each other	Two separate clocks start running, not one combined clock
Early evidence	Secures expert reports and arranges technical inspections	Your technical team needs a briefing before any inspection request arrives
Witness contact	Approaches individuals directly, sometimes ahead of formal notice reaching your side	Internal instructions on who may speak to outside contacts should go out fast
Preservation requests	Asks the relevant court to freeze documents, emails or systems	Routine deletion policies may need to pause across every affected system
Coordination point	Aligns the two proceedings so evidence gathered in one supports the case in the other	A weak answer in one jurisdiction can affect both cases at once

What to do

Respond to the pattern as a whole, not to each incoming request in isolation.

Appoint one internal contact to receive every disclosure request from both jurisdictions and log the date each request arrives.
Freeze routine deletion of documents, emails and version histories connected to the invention, across every relevant system.
Brief the technical team before any inspection request arrives, so nobody is caught explaining a prototype without preparation.
Record every document handed over, noting date, recipient, jurisdiction and the request it answers.
Ask counsel in each jurisdiction to confirm the deadline set by the local court in writing, rather than relying on an informal estimate.
Keep custody of original documents and devices separate from copies sent abroad, so the chain of custody is never in doubt later.

The custody chain matters as much as the content of what is disclosed, because a challenge to how evidence was handled can undo the value of the evidence itself. Custody and control review step by step in detail sets out how to document who held what, and when, in a form that survives cross-examination in either forum.

Who decides and by when

Each jurisdiction's own court or tribunal sets its own timetable, and neither court waits for the other to finish its stage. The case management order issued at the first hearing states the deadline for disclosure in that forum, and the deadline is enforced locally rather than centrally. A missed deadline in one country does not pause the proceeding running in the other, and a party that treats the two as one combined clock usually loses time it cannot recover.

If your situation differs

If the other side has not yet filed in the second jurisdiction, evidence gathering there has not started, and the preservation duties on your side are lighter until it does. Confirm the filing date directly rather than assuming a parallel case exists.

If your team and the disputed technology sit in different countries, expect requests addressed to entities you did not previously think were party to the dispute. Treat each such request as connected to the main case, not as a separate matter.

If a settlement discussion is already open with the other side, ask counsel whether continuing full-scale disclosure in both jurisdictions is still proportionate, or whether a narrower exchange would satisfy both courts.

What this page does not cover

This page describes the sequence of steps the other side typically follows, not the cost of running two evidence tracks at once, and not the fee schedule in either jurisdiction. Cost exposure across parallel proceedings, including security for costs, sits outside this stage and is addressed separately. Once evidence gathering closes, the question for many businesses shifts from procedure to ongoing exposure in the relationship with the other side; Counterparty report before renewing a contract explained covers what a report checks before that relationship continues on other matters.

Verified

Reviewed on the date of publication. Disclosure timing and preservation practice vary by forum and are confirmed against the case management order issued in the specific proceeding, not against a general standard applied across every court. Sources by tier and delivery route overview and its sets out how source tiers are assigned and reviewed across this site.

FAQ

How long does evidence gathering in two countries take in practice?

There is no fixed duration. Each court sets its own timetable through its case management order, and the two timetables rarely align exactly. Plan around the slower of the two forums rather than the faster one.

Which documents are needed to start?

The opening request usually covers technical documentation describing the invention, internal correspondence around its development, and any prior licensing or assignment records. Courts typically add further categories as the case develops.

What happens if the other side does not respond?

A missed deadline in one jurisdiction can lead to an adverse inference against that party or a court order compelling disclosure. It does not automatically affect the parallel proceeding running in the other country.