Abbott vs Sinocare: UPC hears PI cases over glucose-monitoring devices

Diabetes affects millions worldwide and sales of glucose-monitoring devices are correspondingly high. Continuous glucose-monitoring systems have become particularly popular. These systems allow users to monitor their blood glucose levels continuously via mobile phones.

Abbott offers such systems, as does Dexcom. The two Chinese newcomers SiBio Technologies and Sinocare also have them in their portfolios and are currently trying to gain a foothold in Europe. But Abbott appears determined to prevent this. The market leader has sued all three competitors at the UPC.

From the UPC’s inception, Abbott sued Dexcom, which countersued with its own patents. The dispute was initially one of the largest and most intense at the UPC. The competitors also faced each other in national courts. They then settled their global patent dispute in January.

Since the court’s launch two and a half years ago, continuous glucose-monitoring systems have become one of the most contentious medical products at the UPC.

Abbott against the rest

In 2024, Abbott launched a second series of cases against SiBio Technologies concerning three patents in the local divisions of The Hague and Düsseldorf.

Today, the local division is hearing the third set of disputes concerning this technology. Abbott aims to prevent the distribution of Sinocare’s GlucoMen iCan CGM system in Europe and filed two PI applications with the Dutch local division in June 2025.

Abbot is also suing Italian company Menarini Diagnostics. The pharmaceutical group’s medical devices division apparently distributes Sinocare’s GlucoMen iCan systems in Europe.

Abbott alleges the plaintiffs infringe its two patents EP 3 988 471 and EP 4 344 633 and demands sales be stopped in the UPC territory. The local division The Hague under presiding judge Edger Brinkman is hearing both PI actions today (case IDs: ACT_30994/2025 and ACT_30994/2025).

Abbott patents well-known

Also on the panel is Margot Kokke as judge rapporteur. Camille Lignières from the Paris local division is the third legally qualified judge and Alain Dumont is technically qualified judge.

Both Lignières and Dumont are familiar with EP 471, which covers displays for medical devices, as Abbott previously claimed Dexcom infringed this patent at the Paris local division. Dexcom challenged the patent’s validity.

However, the two Dutch judges are also familiar with the technology, as Abbott filed a lawsuit against SiBio Technologies at their local division The Hague — albeit concerning different patents.

Previously, the EPO Opposition Division upheld EP 471 in amended form. The parties did not appeal.

The second PI claim is based on EP 633, which belongs to a different patent family from Abbott’s extensive portfolio. It protects analyte sensor assemblies and has not yet faced a challenge at the EPO, though the opposition period is still running.

The patent was not part of the disputes against Dexcom or SiBio Technologies. Mathys & Squire filed both patents and also defended the opposition against EP 471.

Familiar territory

EP 633 has not yet been the subject of UPC litigation. Meanwhile, EP 471 is not only familiar territory for UPC judges Lignières and Dumont, but the lawyers at today’s hearing have also previously litigated over the patent at the UPC. They now dominate representation in UPC proceedings concerning glucose-monitoring technology.

Taylor Wessing has close ties to Abbott. The law firm is leading most lawsuits across all three series of cases. But leading Paris firm August Debouzy is also present for Abbott again today, with Paris partner François Pochart and Brussels-based Taylor Wessing partner Christian Dekoninck jointly taking the lead in The Hague courtroom. Eindhoven-based counsel Geert Thews is also working on the cases.

Further team members are Laura Coucke from Belgium, Pauline Springorum, Faziel Abdul and Paula Terzini from the Dutch offices as well as Eoin Martyn and Hannah Garvey from the Irisch practice. Of course the London Team is always involved on side of Abbott. Nigel Stoate, Amanda Ebbutt and Matthew Royle are the partnrs supported by Lydia Birch, Julie Chiu and Charlie Madill.

Mehdi Mahammedi-Bouzina supproted August Debouzy partner Prochard.

Taylor Wessing and August Debouzy also jointly conducted the litigation against Dexcom over EP 471 and are working together in the case against SiBio Technologies.

Abbott is therefore likely to be one of the most commercially significant clients for Taylor Wessing’s international patent team, which has made a strong start at the UPC.

Cross-border team from Bird & Bird

Bird & Bird representing Menarini and a distribution partner comes as no surprise. The law firm has very good relations with the Italian life sciences company.

Lawyers from the international law firm are representing the company alone at the UPC against lawsuits from three different competitors. This includes the now-settled dispute with Insult over insulin patch pumps and a recently filed lawsuit by F. Hoffmann-La Roche at the local division in Düsseldorf. This case also concerns a continuous glucose-monitoring product (case ID: ACT_34241/2025). Christopher Maierhöfer from Bird & Bird’s Munich office is leading the case. The firm thus has a significant presence in proceedings concerning glucose-monitoring devices.

Today, however, a mixed team of French, Italian and Dutch lawyers is defending Menarini and Sinocare against Abbott at the local division The Hague. Paris-based partner Thierry Lautier, Dutch partner Tjibbe Douma and Milan partner Edoardo Barbera are leading the case. Pietro Dettori and Andrea Vantini from Bird & Bird’s Milan office provide support alongside Jonathan Hechler from Munich office.

The French team consists of Laurent Labatte, Marylis Clerc, Rémy Cassin and Eva Kessi. From the Dutch offices, patent attorney Frodo Ferro as well as Marijn van der Wal, Laurens Buijtelaar, Pippa van Hengel, and Anna Koster are involved.

SiBio Technologies is relying on a different law firm, namely an international team from Simmons & Simmons. After a less than favourable first round for the Chinese company, this dispute over a new version of SiBio Technologies’ product now appears to be entering its next phase.

Not only the UPC but also the UK

Abbott has not yet filed additional complaints against Sinocare and Menarini at the UPC. At a national level, the opponents have so far fought over trademark rights, including at the UK High Court. However, in spring 2025, the UK court dismissed Abbott’s claim based on a three-dimensional trademark, finding that the trademark representing the “on-body unit” of a continuous glucose-monitoring system was invalid and not infringed. A trademark claim is also pending in Belgium.

Recently, Abbott sued Sinocare and Menarini at the UK High Court for infringement of patents and registered designs (case ID: HP-2025-000035). Taylor Wessing and Bird & Bird are also representing the opposing parties in this case.