JUVE Comment

This mixed IP firm combines a strong litigation team with one of Germany’s largest, market-leading patent prosecution practices. After a year of staff turbulence, this mixed IP firm is now much more broadly positioned in patent litigation with strong footprints in pharma, medical devices and mobile communication.

For many years, the firm was primarily seen as a top address for pharma litigation and for Japanese clients. These two focal points remain fully intact, especially since the pharma litigation-experienced patent attorney team around Gregor König, Dorothea von Renesse and Carla Roth joined the firm and recently secured two important successes in PI proceedings for Bayer and Grünenthal. The fact that Moderna has chosen Hoffmann Eitle’s patent attorneys for its case against BioNTech is a strong indication of the traditional strengths of the patent attorneys before the team around König joined in Düsseldorf.

On the lawyer side, the surprising departure of experienced partner and life sciences litigator Niels Hölder to rival Carpmaels & Ransford was a psychological shock. However, Hoffmann Eitle quickly presented a solution that opens up potential in previously less accessible market segments. The firm reinforced its team with the well-known equity partner Thomas Gniadek from Simmons & Simmons and last year’s JUVE Patent Ones to Watch litigator Jonas Smeets from Bird & Bird. The latter joined on non-equity partner level. Both bring expertise in disputes concerning medtech, electronics, and, most importantly, SEPs and FRAND cases.

In the latter segment, the firm’s core team was recently quite active for Asus in two campaigns regarding wi-fi patents. The new additions and their connections could elevate the litigation team to a new level in this area. The firm is now also active for TCL regarding video coding technology.

The firm’s enormous client base from its technically broad prosecution work offers great potential for the lawyers to represent implementers against patent pools and SEP holders. To ensure that the firm’s significant efforts and substantial investment in its new strategy pay off in the long term, the legal team must continue to grow and successfully harness the firm’s potential in the medtech and automotive sectors. After all, Hoffmann Eitle’s aim is to catch up with the market-leading litigation teams in Germany and at the UPC.

Strengths

Pharma litigation for originators. Mobile communications and medtech. Strong footprint among Asian clients.

Recommended individuals

Thomas Gniadek, Dirk Schüßler-Langeheine, Clemens Steins; patent attorneys: Thorsten Bausch, Morten Garberg, Mark Jones, Peter Klusmann, Gregor König (“one of the best patent attorneys in pharma and biotech litigation”, client; “very good strategist and analyst, especially in life sciences litigation”, competitor), Leo Polz (“conveys in very situation that he can draw on his many years’ experience as a litigator”, competitor), Dorothea von Renesse, Joachim Renken (“highly competent, friendly and reliable”, client; “highly experienced in infringement cases concerning SEPs”, competitor), Carla Roth (“very impressive,receives more work then ever from us”, client; “extremely accomplished patent attorney”, competitor), Georg Siegert, Lasse Weinmann (“I recommend him for oppositions and license-out projects”, client; “outstanding and seasoned patent attorney”, competitor),

Team

114 patent attorneys, 11 lawyers

Partner moves

Thomas Becher (to Hoyng ROKH Monegier), Thomas Gniadek (from Simmons & Simmons), Jonas Smeets (from Bird & Bird), Ronak Kalhor-Witzel (from Norton Rose Fullbright)

Clients

Litigation: Asus against Wilus and Philips over SEPs for Wi-Fi 6; IP Bridge against BYD over 4G patents (settled 2025); TCL against InterDigital video steaming technology; Rakuten against Helios over video steaming technology; Ericsson against Transsion over mobile communications (settled 2026); Homag against Guangdong Super Machinery over coating of workpieces; Bayer and Regeneron against generic drug companies regarding ophthalmic drug Eylea; Grünenthal against Sandoz and Abdi over painkiller naproxen/Vimovo; Moderna against BioNTech over mRNA vaccines for COVID-19; GXD Bio against Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Brainlabs over Deep Brain Stimulation; Astellas against Ratiopharm over mirabegron; Sanofi and Regeneron against Amgen over cholesterol-lowering drug evolocumab/Rapatha/Praluent (settled in 2026); Zapp against Dai Nippon Printing over manufacturing process for metal plates. EPO oppositions: Accord Healthcare against Amgen over apremilast/Otezla; Allergan against Merz over dermal filler syringe; Japan Tobacco International against Philip Morris over inhaler.