# Legal-citation Backfill Proposals — t-paliad-208 (Workstream A)

**Date:** 2026-05-18
**Author:** huygens (researcher)
**Status:** DRAFT — for m's review, not yet migrated
**Branch:** `mai/huygens/workstream-a-backfill`
**Adjacent:** parallel-track with t-paliad-209 (workstream B — `code` rename + UI cleanup; different fields, no overlap)
**Successor:** mig 097 will UPDATE the rows m approves; backup snapshot `deadline_rules_pre_097`

---

## 0. Read-this-first

### 0.1 What this doc is

Today's audit (paliadin/head, 2026-05-18) found that **130 of 213 active+published rows in `paliad.deadline_rules`** have `rule_code IS NULL`, and 122 have `legal_source IS NULL`. The internal slug field `code` (e.g. `inf.sod`, `de_null.berufung`) had been mistaken for a legal citation; it is just the per-proceeding submission identifier. The actual RoP / ZPO / EPÜ / PatG / UPCA citation belongs in `rule_code` (display form) + `legal_source` (structured locator).

This document proposes a citation per rule. m approves; head re-tasks for migration 097.

### 0.2 Field convention (profiled from the 83 already-populated rows)

| Field | Purpose | Examples from live data |
|---|---|---|
| `rule_code` | **Human display form**, what we'd write in a brief | `§ 276 ZPO`, `§ 110 PatG`, `Art. 99 EPÜ`, `R. 71(3) EPÜ`, `R. 116 EPÜ`, `RPBA Art. 12`, `RoP.029.a`, `RoP.220.1.a`, `RoP.151`, `RoP.49.1` |
| `legal_source` | **Structured locator** (forum-prefixed, no zero padding) for cross-system joins / lex extraction | `DE.ZPO.276.1`, `DE.PatG.111.1`, `EU.EPÜ.108`, `EU.EPC-R.71.3`, `EU.RPBA.12.1.c`, `UPC.RoP.29.a`, `UPC.RoP.220.1` |

**Sub-conventions observed in live data**

- `legal_source` prefixes: `DE.<statute>.<n>.<para>`, `EU.EPÜ.<n>.<para>`, `EU.EPC-R.<n>.<para>`, `EU.RPBA.<n>.<para>.<letter>`, `UPC.RoP.<n>.<sub>`.
- `rule_code` padding for UPC RoP is **inconsistent today**: rules below 100 are mostly 3-digit padded (`RoP.029.a`, `RoP.030.1`, `RoP.049.2.a`, `RoP.056.1`) but `rev.defence` carries an un-padded `RoP.49.1`. Rules ≥100 are never padded (`RoP.137.2`, `RoP.220.1`).
  - **Proposed normalization:** 3-digit pad for rules <100, no pad for ≥100. mig 097 should also normalize `RoP.49.1 → RoP.049.1` (1 outlier row, `rev.defence`) as a side-fix. m to confirm.
- `legal_source` for UPC RoP **never** pads (`UPC.RoP.29.a`, not `UPC.RoP.029.a`). I follow that.

### 0.3 Triage philosophy — events vs. deadlines

Of the 130 NULL-rule_code rows, 53 carry a `proceeding_type_id` and 77 are orphans (`proceeding_type_id IS NULL`, also `code IS NULL`). Within the proceeding-typed bucket, most are **event markers** (zero `duration_value`, `event_type ∈ {hearing, decision, filing}`) that anchor other deadlines rather than computing one of their own.

I classify each row as one of:

| Category | Treatment | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| **Deadline** (positive duration, fires off an anchor) | Cite the operative procedural norm. Confidence usually HIGH. | `inf.sod` Klageerwiderung 3 months → RoP.23 |
| **Constitutive event** (zero duration, but a statute defines it) | Cite the constitutive norm (matches existing convention: `de_inf.klage` already has `DE.ZPO.253`). Confidence HIGH where the norm is canonical. | Klageerhebung → § 253 ZPO; Anmeldung EP → Art. 75 EPÜ; Klage UPC → RoP.13.1 |
| **Service / trigger event** (zero duration, third-party delivery) | Cite the service norm (§ 317 ZPO etc.) with MEDIUM confidence — these are anchor events for downstream timers, not deadlines on a party. m may prefer NULL here. **FLAG.** | `de_inf_olg.urteil_lg` Zustellung LG-Urteil |
| **Court-scheduled event** (hearing, judgment-issuance) | Either NULL (recommended) or cite the general norm authorising the court to schedule. **FLAG.** | Mündliche Verhandlung BGH; OLG-Urteil |
| **Court-set duration** (positive duration but `is_court_set=true`, or local practice) | Cite the framing norm (e.g. § 273 ZPO for ZPO patent practice), MEDIUM, FLAG. | `de_inf.replik` 4 weeks (LG patent practice) |

**Where I am proposing NULL**, the row stays as-is on the DB side (mig 097 simply doesn't touch it). The FLAG list at the bottom of this doc enumerates every NULL proposal so m can override with an explicit citation if desired.

### 0.4 Counts

- 130 rows in scope (rule_code IS NULL; is_active=true; lifecycle_state='published')
- 53 proceeding-typed + 77 orphan (no proceeding_type_id, no code)
- 8 rows already carry a `legal_source` — those are **easy wins**: only `rule_code` needs proposing
- ~ 40 HIGH-confidence proposals
- ~ 35 MEDIUM-confidence proposals
- ~ 55 FLAG entries (court-scheduled events, combined-pleading rows, ambiguous orphans)

The orphan bucket carries a noticeable number of **duplicates** (six "Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung" rows, two "Beginn des Hauptsacheverfahrens", two "Antrag auf Patentänderung", etc.). Those are likely vestiges of older Fristenrechner pipelines; backfilling them with the same citation is fine, but m may want a separate dedup pass (out of scope here; flag in § 4).

---

## 1. Easy wins — rows with `legal_source` already set, `rule_code` missing (8)

For these, the structured locator is already in the DB; only the display form is missing.

| id | code / name | duration | existing `legal_source` | proposed `rule_code` | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `1f532c82…` | `de_inf.klage` / Klageerhebung | event | `DE.ZPO.253` | `§ 253 ZPO` | HIGH |
| `20254f4e…` | (orphan) Einspruch gegen Versäumnisurteil | 2 weeks | `DE.ZPO.339.1` | `§ 339 ZPO` | HIGH |
| `3c36f149…` | (orphan) Schriftsatznachreichung (§ 296a ZPO) | 3 weeks | `DE.ZPO.296a` | `§ 296a ZPO` | HIGH |
| `f1099cf6…` | (orphan) Weiterbehandlungsantrag (Art. 121 EPÜ) | 2 months | `EU.EPC-R.135.1` | `R. 135 EPÜ` | HIGH |
| `c24d494c…` | (orphan) Wiedereinsetzungsantrag (§ 123 PatG) | 2 months | `DE.PatG.123.2` | `§ 123 PatG` | HIGH |
| `d40d9be7…` | (orphan) Wiedereinsetzungsantrag (§ 233 ZPO) | 2 weeks | `DE.ZPO.234.1` | `§ 234 ZPO` | HIGH |
| `23c6f445…` | (orphan) Wiedereinsetzungsantrag (Art. 122 EPÜ) | 2 months | `EU.EPC-R.136.1` | `R. 136 EPÜ` | HIGH |
| `b588fa64…` | (orphan) Wiedereinsetzungsantrag (DPMA) | 2 months | `DE.PatG.123.2` | `§ 123 PatG` | HIGH |

**Naming note on the two Wiedereinsetzung-`§ 123 PatG` rows.** Both `c24d494c…` ("§ 123 PatG" name) and `b588fa64…` ("DPMA" name) map to the same statute — § 123 PatG (Wiedereinsetzung) applies to all DPMA-Verfahren, so the duplication is a pure naming choice. mig 097 fills both; potential dedup is a separate question (§ 4 FLAG-A).

---

## 2. Proceeding-typed rows (53)

Grouped by `proceeding_types.code`. Within each group: alphabetical by `code`.

### 2.1 `upc.inf.cfi` — Verletzungsverfahren CFI (4 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `inf.decision` | Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.118 — but this is the court's own decision, not a party deadline | **FLAG-B** |
| `inf.interim` | Zwischenverfahren | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.101 ff. governs interim procedure; not a single norm | **FLAG-B** |
| `inf.oral` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.111-117 (oral procedure); court-scheduled | **FLAG-B** |
| `inf.soc` | Klageerhebung (Statement of claim) | event | filing | `RoP.013.1` | `UPC.RoP.13.1` | RoP.13 — Statement of claim contents | HIGH |

### 2.2 `upc.rev.cfi` — Nichtigkeitsverfahren CFI (6 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `rev.app` | Nichtigkeitsklage | event | filing | `RoP.042` | `UPC.RoP.42` | RoP.42 — Statement for revocation | HIGH |
| `rev.decision` | Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | court-issued, not a party deadline | **FLAG-B** |
| `rev.interim` | Zwischenverfahren | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | not a single norm | **FLAG-B** |
| `rev.oral` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | court-scheduled | **FLAG-B** |
| `rev.reply` | Replik | 2 months | filing | `RoP.052` | `UPC.RoP.52` | RoP.52 — Reply to defence in revocation | MED (**FLAG-C**: duration vs. norm) |
| `rev.rejoin` | Duplik | 2 months | filing | `RoP.052` | `UPC.RoP.52` | RoP.52 — Rejoinder | MED (**FLAG-C**: duration vs. norm) |

**FLAG-C:** RoP.52(1) sets the reply to 2 months but RoP.52(2) sets the rejoinder to 1 month from service of the reply. m's `rev.rejoin` says 2 months — verify whether the rule duration is correct or whether `RoP.52.2` (1 month) is the right citation. Cross-check with the existing `rev.rejoin_cci` row which uses RoP.056.4 (cci context); the main-pleadings rejoinder lives in RoP.52.

### 2.3 `upc.pi.cfi` — Einstweilige Maßnahmen (4 rules)

All four rules are currently NULL on both fields.

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `pi.app` | Antrag | event | filing | `RoP.206` | `UPC.RoP.206` | RoP.206 — Application for provisional measures | HIGH |
| `pi.oral` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.209 — at judge's discretion | **FLAG-B** |
| `pi.order` | Beschluss | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.211 — court-issued | **FLAG-B** |
| `pi.response` | Erwiderung | event | filing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.209.1 — judge sets time; no statutory period | **FLAG-B** (alt: `RoP.209.1` / `UPC.RoP.209.1` to flag as court-set) |

### 2.4 `upc.apl.merits` — Berufungsverfahren Merits (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `app.decision` | Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.350 — appellate decision | **FLAG-B** |
| `app.oral` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | `RoP.243` | `UPC.RoP.243` | RoP.243 — oral procedure in appeal | MED |
| `app.response` | Berufungserwiderung | 2 months | filing | `RoP.235.1` | `UPC.RoP.235.1` | RoP.235.1 — Statement of response | MED (**FLAG-C**: RoP.235.1 says 3 months for main-judgment appeals; 2 months may be a residual from a different appeal track. Verify duration vs. norm.) |

### 2.5 `upc.apl.order` — Berufungsverfahren Anordnungen (1 rule)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `app_ord.order` | Anordnung / angegriffene Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | trigger event for orders-appeal; RoP.220.1.c references it | **FLAG-B** (alt: `RoP.220.1.c` to surface) |

### 2.6 `upc.apl.cost` — Berufungsverfahren Kosten (1 rule)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `cost.decision` | Kostenfestsetzungsbeschluss | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | RoP.150 ff. — cost decision in the assessment proceedings | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.7 `upc.dmgs.cfi` — Schadensbemessungsverfahren (1 rule)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `damages.app` | Antrag auf Schadensbemessung | event | filing | `RoP.131` | `UPC.RoP.131` | RoP.131 — Application for damages determination | HIGH |

### 2.8 `upc.disc.cfi` — Bucheinsichtsverfahren (1 rule)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `disc.app` | Antrag auf Bucheinsicht | event | filing | `RoP.141` | `UPC.RoP.141` | RoP.141 — Application for order to lay open books | HIGH |

### 2.9 `de.inf.lg` — Verletzungsverfahren LG (5 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `de_inf.klage` | Klageerhebung | event | filing | `§ 253 ZPO` | `DE.ZPO.253` *(already set)* | § 253 ZPO — Klageschrift | HIGH (rule_code only) |
| `de_inf.replik` | Replik | 4 weeks | filing | `§ 273 ZPO` | `DE.ZPO.273` | § 273 ZPO — vorbereitende Anordnungen / court-set period (Düsseldorfer Praxis) | MED (**FLAG-D**: 4 weeks is local LG practice, no statutory period; flag `is_court_set=true` already true in DB) |
| `de_inf.duplik` | Duplik | 4 weeks | filing | `§ 273 ZPO` | `DE.ZPO.273` | same | MED (**FLAG-D**) |
| `de_inf.termin` | Haupttermin | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 272 / § 137 ZPO — court-scheduled | **FLAG-B** |
| `de_inf.urteil` | Urteil | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 300 ZPO — court-issued | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.10 `de.inf.olg` — Berufungsverfahren OLG Verletzung (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `de_inf_olg.urteil_lg` | Zustellung LG-Urteil | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 317 ZPO` | `DE.ZPO.317` | § 317 ZPO — Zustellung von Urteilen | MED (**FLAG-E**: service-trigger event — may be NULL per philosophy) |
| `de_inf_olg.termin` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | court-scheduled | **FLAG-B** |
| `de_inf_olg.urteil_olg` | OLG-Urteil | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | court-issued | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.11 `de.inf.bgh` — Revision/NZB BGH Verletzung (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `de_inf_bgh.urteil_olg` | Zustellung OLG-Urteil | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 317 ZPO` | `DE.ZPO.317` | § 317 ZPO — Zustellung | MED (**FLAG-E**) |
| `de_inf_bgh.termin` | Mündliche Verhandlung BGH | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 555 i.V.m. § 137 ZPO — court-scheduled | **FLAG-B** |
| `de_inf_bgh.urteil_bgh` | BGH-Urteil | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 562, § 563 ZPO — court-issued | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.12 `de.null.bpatg` — Nichtigkeitsverfahren BPatG (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `de_null.klage` | Nichtigkeitsklage | event | filing | `§ 81 PatG` | `DE.PatG.81.1` | § 81 PatG — Nichtigkeitsklage einreichen | HIGH |
| `de_null.termin` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 89 PatG | **FLAG-B** |
| `de_null.urteil` | Urteil | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 84 PatG | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.13 `de.null.bgh` — Berufung BGH Nichtigkeit (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `de_null_bgh.urteil_bpatg` | Zustellung BPatG-Urteil | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 99 PatG` | `DE.PatG.99.1` | § 99 PatG verweist auf ZPO; Zustellung der BPatG-Urteile | MED (**FLAG-E**) |
| `de_null_bgh.termin` | Mündliche Verhandlung BGH | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 113 PatG i.V.m. ZPO | **FLAG-B** |
| `de_null_bgh.urteil_bgh` | BGH-Urteil | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 119 PatG | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.14 `dpma.opp.dpma` — Einspruchsverfahren DPMA (2 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `dpma_opp.publish` | Veröffentlichung der Erteilung | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 58 PatG` | `DE.PatG.58.1` | § 58(1) PatG — Veröffentlichung der Erteilung im Patentblatt | HIGH |
| `dpma_opp.entscheidung` | DPMA-Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 47 PatG ff. | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.15 `dpma.appeal.bpatg` — Beschwerdeverfahren BPatG vs. DPMA (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `dpma_bpatg.entscheidung` | Zustellung DPMA-Entscheidung | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 47 PatG` | `DE.PatG.47.1` | § 47 PatG — Zustellung der Entscheidung im DPMA-Verfahren | MED (**FLAG-E**: trigger-event citation. Alternative `§ 127 PatG` for service procedure.) |
| `dpma_bpatg.entsch_bpatg` | BPatG-Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 79 PatG | **FLAG-B** |
| `dpma_bpatg.termin` | Mündliche Verhandlung BPatG | event | hearing | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 78 PatG | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.16 `dpma.appeal.bgh` — Rechtsbeschwerdeverfahren BGH (2 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `dpma_bgh.entsch_bpatg` | Zustellung BPatG-Entscheidung | event | filing (trigger) | `§ 79 PatG` | `DE.PatG.79.1` | § 79 PatG — Zustellung der BPatG-Entscheidung | MED (**FLAG-E**) |
| `dpma_bgh.entsch_bgh` | BGH-Entscheidung | event | decision | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | § 107 PatG | **FLAG-B** |

### 2.17 `epa.grant.exa` — EP-Erteilungsverfahren (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `ep_grant.filing` | Anmeldung | event | filing | `Art. 75 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.75` | Art. 75 EPÜ — Filing of European patent application | HIGH |
| `ep_grant.search` | Recherchenbericht | 6 months | decision | `Art. 92 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.92` | Art. 92 EPÜ — Drawing up of the European search report | MED (the 6-month figure is a Richtwert per `deadline_notes` — not a statutory deadline. Could also cite `R. 65 EPÜ` if we want the issuance procedure.) |
| `ep_grant.grant` | Erteilung (B1) | event | decision | `Art. 97 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.97.1` | Art. 97(1) EPÜ — Decision to grant | HIGH |

### 2.18 `epa.opp.opd` — Einspruchsverfahren EPA (2 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `epa_opp.grant` | Veröffentlichung der Erteilung | event | filing (trigger) | `Art. 97 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.97.3` | Art. 97(3) EPÜ — mention of grant; trigger for the 9-month Einspruchsfrist (Art. 99(1) EPÜ) | HIGH |
| `epa_opp.entsch` | Entscheidung | event | decision | `Art. 101 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.101` | Art. 101 EPÜ — Decision on opposition | HIGH |

### 2.19 `epa.opp.boa` — Beschwerdeverfahren BoA (3 rules)

| code | name | duration | event_type | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `epa_app.entsch` | Zustellung der Beschwerdeentscheidung | event | filing (trigger) | `R. 111 EPÜ` | `EU.EPC-R.111` | R. 111 EPÜ — Form and notification of decisions | MED (**FLAG-E**: service-trigger citation. Could also cite `Art. 119 EPÜ` for notification.) |
| `epa_app.oral` | Mündliche Verhandlung | event | hearing | `Art. 116 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.116` | Art. 116 EPÜ — Oral proceedings | HIGH |
| `epa_app.entsch2` | Entscheidung | event | decision | `Art. 111 EPÜ` | `EU.EPÜ.111` | Art. 111 EPÜ — Decision in respect of appeals | HIGH |

---

## 3. Orphan rows — `proceeding_type_id IS NULL` and `code IS NULL` (77)

Identified by `id` (UUID first 8 chars) + name. These are the older Fristenrechner catalogue rows that pre-date the proceeding-typed slice and were never re-anchored to a proceeding. Many are 1:1 duplicates of rules that now live in proceeding-typed form.

### 3.1 UPC RoP — main-pleadings track (15)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf | dedup hint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `e34097d6…` | Klageerwiderung | 3 mo | `RoP.023` | `UPC.RoP.23.1` | RoP.23.1 — Statement of defence | HIGH | dup of `inf.sod` |
| `7d8a4804…` | Nichtigkeitswiderklage | 3 mo | `RoP.025.1` | `UPC.RoP.25.1` | RoP.25.1 — Counterclaim for revocation | HIGH | — |
| `c7523e6b…` | Verletzungswiderklage | 2 mo | `RoP.049.2.b` | `UPC.RoP.49.2.b` | RoP.49.2.b — Counterclaim for infringement in revocation | HIGH | dup of `rev.cc_inf` |
| `c57f62f8…` | Vorgängige Einrede | 1 mo | `RoP.019.1` | `UPC.RoP.19.1` | RoP.19.1 — Preliminary objection | HIGH | dup of `inf.prelim` / `rev.prelim` |
| `cec1a865…` | Erwiderung Nichtigkeitswiderklage **+** Replik Klageerwiderung | 2 mo | `RoP.029.a` | `UPC.RoP.29.a` | RoP.29.a / .b — combined Defence-to-CCR + Reply to SoD | HIGH (**FLAG-F**: combined-pleading orphan — m to confirm one citation is sufficient or whether row should be split) |
| `84b390e0…` | Replik auf die Klageerwiderung | 2 mo | `RoP.029.b` | `UPC.RoP.29.b` | RoP.29.b — Reply to defence | HIGH | dup of `inf.reply` |
| `176cc1ca…` | Duplik zur Replik auf die Klageerwiderung | 1 mo | `RoP.029.c` | `UPC.RoP.29.c` | RoP.29.c — Rejoinder | HIGH | dup of `inf.rejoin` |
| `02ae9c1f…` | Duplik zur Replik, Replik auf die Erwiderung zum Patentänderungsantrag | 1 mo | `RoP.029.c` | `UPC.RoP.29.c` | combined: RoP.29.c + RoP.32.3 | MED (**FLAG-F**) |
| `ec2a1274…` | Replik auf Erwiderung Widerklage, Duplik Replik Klageerwiderung, Erwiderung Patentänderungsantrag | 2 mo | `RoP.029.d` | `UPC.RoP.29.d` | combined: RoP.29.d + RoP.29.c + RoP.32.1 | MED (**FLAG-F**: three-norm combined row) |
| `a32dcec1…` | Erwiderung auf die Nichtigkeitsklage | 2 mo | `RoP.049.1` | `UPC.RoP.49.1` | RoP.49.1 — Defence to revocation | HIGH | dup of `rev.defence` |
| `37bd034b…` | Replik Erwiderung Nichtigkeitsklage + Erwiderung Patentänderungsantrag + Erwiderung Verletzungswiderklage | 2 mo | `RoP.051` | `UPC.RoP.51` | combined: RoP.51 + RoP.49.2.a-reply + RoP.56.1 | MED (**FLAG-F**) |
| `1b5c6dee…` | Duplik zur Replik auf die Erwiderung zur Nichtigkeitsklage | 1 mo | `RoP.052` | `UPC.RoP.52` | RoP.52 — Rejoinder in revocation | MED |
| `bea86f9b…` | Erwiderung auf die Verletzungswiderklage | 2 mo | `RoP.056.1` | `UPC.RoP.56.1` | RoP.56.1 | HIGH | dup of `rev.def_cci` |
| `4834c957…` | Replik auf die Erwiderung zur Verletzungswiderklage | 1 mo | `RoP.056.3` | `UPC.RoP.56.3` | RoP.56.3 | HIGH | dup of `rev.reply_def_cci` |
| `7b548c48…` | Duplik (Verletzungswiderklage + Patentänderungsantrag) | 1 mo | `RoP.056.4` | `UPC.RoP.56.4` | combined: RoP.56.4 + RoP.32.3 | MED (**FLAG-F**) |

### 3.2 UPC RoP — Patentänderungs-Track (5)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf | dedup hint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `fb7050c6…` | Antrag auf Patentänderung | 2 mo | `RoP.030.1` | `UPC.RoP.30.1` | RoP.30.1 (infringement context) | MED (**FLAG-G**: 2 rows with identical name + 2-month dur; one likely refers to `RoP.30.1` infringement, other to `RoP.49.2.a` revocation) |
| `21e67ac1…` | Antrag auf Patentänderung | 2 mo | `RoP.049.2.a` | `UPC.RoP.49.2.a` | RoP.49.2.a (revocation context) | MED (**FLAG-G**) |
| `7e65a434…` | Erwiderung auf den Antrag auf Patentänderung | 2 mo | `RoP.032.1` | `UPC.RoP.32.1` | RoP.32.1 — Defence to application to amend | HIGH | dup of `inf.def_to_amend` |
| `dfd52792…` | Replik auf die Erwiderung zum Patentänderungsantrag | 1 mo | `RoP.032.3` | `UPC.RoP.32.3` | RoP.32.3 — Reply | HIGH | dup of `inf.reply_def_amd` |
| `8cdf54eb…` | Duplik zur Replik auf die Erwiderung zum Patentänderungsantrag | 1 mo | `RoP.032.3` | `UPC.RoP.32.3` | RoP.32.3 — Rejoinder | HIGH | dup of `inf.rejoin_amd` |

### 3.3 UPC RoP — appeal track (16)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf | dedup hint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `1dfba5b1…` | Berufungsschrift gegen Entscheidung nach R. 220.1(a)/(b) | 2 mo | `RoP.224.1.a` | `UPC.RoP.224.1.a` | RoP.224.1.a — Notice of appeal, main-judgment track | HIGH | dup of `app.notice` |
| `5c0508f4…` | Berufungsschrift gegen Entscheidung nach R. 220.1(a)/(b) | 2 mo | `RoP.224.1.a` | `UPC.RoP.224.1.a` | same | HIGH | duplicate-of-duplicate (**FLAG-A**) |
| `d560b3b6…` | Berufungsschrift gegen Anordnung R. 220.1(c) / R. 220.2 / 221.3 | 15 d | `RoP.224.1.b` | `UPC.RoP.224.1.b` | RoP.224.1.b — Notice of appeal, orders/leave track | HIGH | dup of `app_ord.with_leave`-family |
| `791fd0f7…` | Berufungsbegründung Entscheidung R. 220.1(a)/(b) | 4 mo | `RoP.225.1` | `UPC.RoP.225.1` | RoP.225.1 — Statement of grounds, main track | HIGH | dup of `app.grounds` |
| `573df3d1…` | Berufungsbegründung Entscheidung R. 220.1(a)/(b) | 4 mo | `RoP.225.1` | `UPC.RoP.225.1` | same | HIGH | duplicate-of-duplicate (**FLAG-A**) |
| `c3a369f9…` | Berufungsbegründung Anordnung R. 220.1(c) / R. 220.2 / 221.3 | 15 d | `RoP.225.2` | `UPC.RoP.225.2` | RoP.225.2 — Statement of grounds, orders/leave | MED (**FLAG-H**: RoP.225.2 form; verify 15d figure aligns with current RoP version) |
| `91e367dd…` | Berufung (Anordnungen & mit Zulassung) | 15 d | `RoP.224.1.b` | `UPC.RoP.224.1.b` | same | MED | dup of `app_ord.with_leave` |
| `ccb916df…` | Antrag auf Berufungszulassung gegen Kostenentscheidungen | 15 d | `RoP.221.1` | `UPC.RoP.221.1` | RoP.221.1 — Leave to appeal cost decisions | HIGH | dup of `cost.leave_app` |
| `342e749d…` | Antrag auf Ermessensüberprüfung | 15 d | `RoP.220.3` | `UPC.RoP.220.3` | RoP.220.3 — Discretionary review | HIGH | dup of `app_ord.discretion` |
| `d4f739cd…` | Anfechtung einer Entscheidung über Verwerfung der Berufung als unzulässig | 1 mo | `RoP.234.1` | `UPC.RoP.234.1` | RoP.234 — Inadmissibility of appeal review | MED (**FLAG-H**: confirm sub-paragraph; RoP.234 governs the topic but the 1-month review window may sit elsewhere) |
| `10374392…` | Berufungserwiderung (zur Berufung nach R. 224.2(a)) | 3 mo | `RoP.235.1` | `UPC.RoP.235.1` | RoP.235.1 — Statement of response, main track | HIGH |
| `4c585c6d…` | Berufungserwiderung (zur Berufung nach R. 224.2(b)) | 15 d | `RoP.235.4` | `UPC.RoP.235.4` | RoP.235.4 — Statement of response, orders/leave track | MED (**FLAG-H**: confirm RoP.235.4 vs. RoP.235.2 in current RoP version) |
| `6e39b653…` | Anschlussberufungsschrift (zur Berufung R. 224.2(a)) | 3 mo | `RoP.237.1` | `UPC.RoP.237.1` | RoP.237.1 — Cross-appeal | HIGH |
| `a00e51bb…` | Anschlussberufungsschrift (zur Berufung R. 224.2(b)) | 15 d | `RoP.237.2` | `UPC.RoP.237.2` | RoP.237 — Cross-appeal in orders track | MED (**FLAG-H**) |
| `6b989e85…` | Erwiderung auf Anschlussberufungsschrift (R. 224.2(a)) | 2 mo | `RoP.238.1` | `UPC.RoP.238.1` | RoP.238.1 — Reply to cross-appeal | HIGH | dup of `app.cross_a_reply` |
| `e78f4652…` | Erwiderung auf Anschlussberufungsschrift (R. 224.2(b)) | 15 d | `RoP.238.2` | `UPC.RoP.238.2` | RoP.238.2 — Reply to cross-appeal, orders track | HIGH | dup of `app_ord.cross_reply` |

### 3.4 UPC RoP — Schadensbemessung / Rechnungslegung (7)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf | dedup hint |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `d414f603…` | Erwiderung Antrag auf Schadensersatzbemessung | 2 mo | `RoP.137.2` | `UPC.RoP.137.2` | RoP.137.2 | HIGH | dup of `damages.defence` |
| `9f39e263…` | Replik Erwiderung Schadensersatzbemessung | 1 mo | `RoP.139` | `UPC.RoP.139` | RoP.139 | HIGH | dup of `damages.reply` |
| `067ffdf0…` | Duplik Replik Schadensersatzbemessung | 1 mo | `RoP.139` | `UPC.RoP.139` | RoP.139 | HIGH | dup of `damages.rejoin` |
| `429b8ec0…` | Erwiderung Antrag auf Rechnungslegung | 2 mo | `RoP.142.2` | `UPC.RoP.142.2` | RoP.142.2 — Defence in account procedure | HIGH | dup of `disc.defence` |
| `8d36fc76…` | Replik Erwiderung Rechnungslegung | 14 d | `RoP.142.3` | `UPC.RoP.142.3` | RoP.142.3 | HIGH | dup of `disc.reply` |
| `ed82fec9…` | Duplik Replik Erwiderung Rechnungslegung | 14 d | `RoP.142.3` | `UPC.RoP.142.3` | RoP.142.3 | HIGH | dup of `disc.rejoin` |
| `eed69e8b…` | Antrag auf Kostenentscheidung | 1 mo | `RoP.151` | `UPC.RoP.151` | RoP.151 — Application for cost decision | HIGH | dup of `inf.cost_app` |

### 3.5 UPC RoP — provisional / PI (6)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `ba335c99…` | Beginn des Hauptsacheverfahrens | 31 d | `RoP.213.1` | `UPC.RoP.213.1` | RoP.213.1 — 31 days or 20 working days after PI granted | HIGH |
| `d886f46f…` | Beginn des Hauptsacheverfahrens | 31 d | `RoP.213.1` | `UPC.RoP.213.1` | same — duplicate row (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `1f1f72ef…` | Antrag auf Überprüfung der Beweissicherungsanordnung | 30 d | `RoP.197.3` | `UPC.RoP.197.3` | RoP.197.3 — Review of evidence preservation order | HIGH |
| `3e2f5697…` | Erneuerung der Schutzschrift | 6 mo | `RoP.207.9` | `UPC.RoP.207.9` | RoP.207.9 — Protective letter, 6-month validity | HIGH |

### 3.6 UPC RoP — feststellungs / Widerruf-Track (4)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `521bf607…` | Erwiderung auf negative Feststellungsklage | 2 mo | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | UPC declaration of non-infringement procedure follows RoP.49 ff. by analogy (RoP.69 references) | **FLAG-I**: negative declaration track has no single statutory norm; cite either `RoP.069` / `UPC.RoP.69` (general procedure) or leave NULL pending m's call |
| `e887b1fb…` | Replik Erwiderung negative Feststellungsklage | 1 mo | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | same | **FLAG-I** |
| `0cf1d755…` | Duplik Replik Erwiderung negative Feststellungsklage | 1 mo | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | same | **FLAG-I** |

### 3.7 UPC RoP — formalities / Registry (14)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `d058f412…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | RoP.16.4 — Notice to remedy defects | HIGH |
| `c690c323…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | same — duplicate (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `5f2884a4…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | duplicate (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `13600049…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | duplicate (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `ceb780ba…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | duplicate (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `d51c50eb…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Zahlung | 14 d | `RoP.016.4` | `UPC.RoP.16.4` | duplicate (**FLAG-A**) | HIGH |
| `3bc40027…` | Mängelbeseitigung / Einreichung schriftlicher Stellungnahme | 14 d | `RoP.016.5` | `UPC.RoP.16.5` | RoP.16.5 — Written observations after Registry notice | MED |
| `69e356b7…` | Antrag auf Vertraulichkeit gegenüber der Öffentlichkeit | 14 d | `RoP.262.2` | `UPC.RoP.262.2` | RoP.262.2 — Confidentiality vis-à-vis public (note in DB confirms) | HIGH |
| `57e6eeca…` | Berichtigung von Entscheidungen und Anordnungen | 1 mo | `RoP.353` | `UPC.RoP.353` | RoP.353 — Rectification of decisions/orders | HIGH |
| `8ec233b9…` | Antrag auf Überprüfung verfahrensleitender Anordnung | 15 d | `RoP.333.1` | `UPC.RoP.333.1` | RoP.333.1 — Review of procedural order | HIGH |
| `d124c95b…` | Antrag auf Aufhebung oder Änderung Entscheidung des Amtes | 1 mo | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | unclear which Amts-Entscheidung this targets — Registry order? Unitary-effect refusal? | **FLAG-J** (recommend NULL; ask m what proceeding-context this row maps to) |
| `0531b6ba…` | Antrag auf Aufhebung Entscheidung EPA über einheitliche Wirkung | 3 wk | `RoP.097.1` | `UPC.RoP.97.1` | RoP.97.1 — Action against EPO decision on unitary effect | MED (**FLAG-H**: verify 3-week period vs. norm; current RoP gives 1 month for such applications under R.88 EPÜ-UPC; possibly outdated) |
| `6b6b967c…` | Antrag auf Verweisung an die Zentralkammer | 10 d | `RoP.037.4` | `UPC.RoP.37.4` | RoP.37 governs division apportionment; .4 is the 10-day observation period | MED (**FLAG-H**: confirm sub-paragraph) |
| `002c2ba7…` | Antrag auf Folgemaßnahmen rechtskräftiger Validitätsentscheidung | 2 mo | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | likely refers to post-revocation register-correction request; norm uncertain | **FLAG-J** |

### 3.8 UPC RoP — translation / interpretation (3)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `bb7bafcb…` | Antrag auf Simultanübersetzung | 1 mo (before) | `RoP.109.1` | `UPC.RoP.109.1` | RoP.109.1 — Request for simultaneous interpretation | HIGH |
| `8c682cff…` | Mitteilung über Beauftragung eines Dolmetschers auf Kosten der Partei | 2 wk (before) | `RoP.109.5` | `UPC.RoP.109.5` | RoP.109.5 — Notice of own-cost interpreter | MED (**FLAG-H**: confirm sub-paragraph; RoP.109 governs interpretation but the specific 2-week notice rule may sit at .4 or .5) |
| `9ed513c1…` | Einreichung von Übersetzungen von Schriftstücken | 1 mo | `RoP.007.2` | `UPC.RoP.7.2` | RoP.7.2 — Language of documents | MED (**FLAG-H**: alternative `RoP.7.4` for translations of party-submitted documents) |
| `902cc5d5…` | Klärung von Übersetzungsfragen | 2 wk | *(NULL)* | *(NULL)* | unclear which "Übersetzungsfrage" rule | **FLAG-J** |

### 3.9 UPC RoP — review / rehearing (2)

| id8 | name (orphan) | dur | proposed `rule_code` | proposed `legal_source` | source-of-truth | conf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| `372e86e3…` | Antrag auf Wiederaufnahme (schwerwiegender Verfahrensmangel) | 2 mo | `RoP.247.2` | `UPC.RoP.247.2` | RoP.247.2 — Application for rehearing within 2 months | HIGH |
| `58de9573…` | Antrag auf Wiederaufnahme (Straftat) | 2 mo | `RoP.247.2` | `UPC.RoP.247.2` | RoP.247.1(b) substantively (criminal act ground); RoP.247.2 for the 2-month period | HIGH |

### 3.10 Already-cited orphans (covered in § 1 Easy wins, 7 rows)

`20254f4e…`, `3c36f149…`, `f1099cf6…`, `c24d494c…`, `d40d9be7…`, `23c6f445…`, `b588fa64…` — see § 1.

---

## 4. FLAG summary — items needing m's call

| FLAG | Topic | Count | Decision needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| **A** | Genuine duplicate orphan rows (same name + dur + citation) | ~10 | Confirm the dedup pass should happen in mig 097 (or a follow-up). Recommended: leave duplicates in place for mig 097 (fills all of them with the same citation); dedup separately so the rule-resolution semantics don't drift. |
| **B** | Court-scheduled / court-issued event rows (Mündliche Verhandlung, Urteil, Entscheidung) | ~22 | Confirm NULL is the right default. Alternative: cite the framing norm with a "context" note. |
| **C** | UPC RoP duration vs. norm mismatch (`rev.reply` / `rev.rejoin` / `app.response`) | 3 | Verify the rule durations are correct as stored — proposed citations are canonical but rule duration may be from an older RoP version. |
| **D** | German LG patent practice: 4-week replik/duplik (court-set) | 2 | Confirm `§ 273 ZPO` is the cite m wants (no statutory period, framing norm only). |
| **E** | Service / trigger-event citations (`§ 317 ZPO`, `R. 111 EPÜ` etc.) | 6 | These are anchor-events for downstream timers, not deadlines. Confirm whether to cite (current proposal) or leave NULL. |
| **F** | Combined-pleading orphan rows (one row = several norms) | 5 | Confirm one citation is acceptable, or whether the rows should be split before mig 097 (out of scope here). |
| **G** | Twin "Antrag auf Patentänderung" orphans (2-mo, identical name) | 2 | Confirm one is infringement-context (`RoP.30.1`), the other revocation-context (`RoP.49.2.a`). |
| **H** | RoP sub-paragraph uncertainty (current text vs. older version) | ~8 | Spot-check against current published RoP; my citations are canonical but small `.x` numbers may need a tweak. |
| **I** | Negative-declaration track (no single UPC norm) | 3 | Confirm citing `RoP.69` (procedure-by-analogy) vs. leaving NULL. |
| **J** | Orphan with unclear scope | 3 | `d124c95b…` (Aufhebung Entscheidung des Amtes), `002c2ba7…` (Folgemaßnahmen Validitätsentscheidung), `902cc5d5…` (Klärung Übersetzungsfragen). m to identify which UPC norm. |

---

## 5. Side-fix (recommend bundled in mig 097)

**RoP-display normalization**: `rev.defence` currently carries `rule_code = "RoP.49.1"`. All other RoP rules under 100 use 3-digit padding (`RoP.029.a`, `RoP.049.2.a` etc.). mig 097 should normalize `RoP.49.1 → RoP.049.1` in that one row, while filling the 130 NULL rows with consistently padded values.

```sql
-- side-fix candidate
UPDATE paliad.deadline_rules
   SET rule_code = 'RoP.049.1'
 WHERE rule_code = 'RoP.49.1'
   AND code      = 'rev.defence';   -- only one row; idempotent
```

This is opt-in; m to confirm before mig 097 ships.

---

## 6. Migration 097 hints (for the coder who writes it)

**Shape m has asked for:**

- `UPDATE paliad.deadline_rules SET rule_code = …, legal_source = … WHERE id = … AND rule_code IS NULL AND legal_source IS [NULL|expected];`
- Idempotent: `WHERE rule_code IS NULL` (or `IS DISTINCT FROM`) guard so re-applying is a no-op.
- Backup snapshot: `CREATE TABLE paliad.deadline_rules_pre_097 AS SELECT * FROM paliad.deadline_rules` before any UPDATEs.
- Wrap in `audit_reason = 't-paliad-208 legal-citation backfill'` (matches `paliad.audit_log` pattern used elsewhere).
- Touch only the m-approved rows from § 1, § 2, § 3 — FLAG rows (those with `*(NULL)*` in the proposed columns) stay untouched until m resolves them.
- Side-fix § 5 (`RoP.49.1 → RoP.049.1`) only if m confirms.

**Counts the migration should match (assuming m approves all HIGH proposals as-is):**

- Easy wins (§ 1): 8 `rule_code` UPDATEs (legal_source already set)
- Proceeding-typed HIGH/MED proposals (§ 2): ~25 rows
- Orphan HIGH/MED proposals (§ 3): ~50 rows
- Total expected `rule_code` writes: ~83 rows
- Total expected `legal_source` writes: ~75 rows (8 of the easy wins already have one)
- FLAG rows left NULL: ~47 rows pending m's decisions

---

## 7. Open questions for m

1. **NULL for event-markers (FLAG-B):** confirm NULL is correct for the 22 court-scheduled / court-issued event rows. If m wants citations there too, I'll do a second pass.
2. **Trigger-event citations (FLAG-E):** apply `§ 317 ZPO` to LG/OLG service rows, or leave NULL?
3. **Duplicates (FLAG-A):** mig 097 fills duplicates with the same citation; do you want a separate dedup pass scheduled (filing `t-paliad-21x`) or is the duplicate count acceptable for now?
4. **Combined-pleading orphans (FLAG-F):** keep one citation per row, or split each row into N rows before mig 097?
5. **Negative-declaration track (FLAG-I):** cite `RoP.69` by analogy, or leave NULL?
6. **Side-fix (§ 5):** normalize the one `RoP.49.1` outlier as part of mig 097?

Once m answers, head can re-task this same worker (or a fresh coder) to write mig 097 against the approved proposals.
