Contested, in the legal parlance, would mean no evidence - not theory or conjecture - put forth that challenges or impugns the nature of the evidence by Patel.
So say in a trial, a ballistic expert testifies it was "x,y,z cal from said gun" and nothing contested that by way of competing evidence it would an uncontested fact the jury would take into account
Now if there was someone else in the room with a different view that would be another matter
