JUVE Comment

This medium-sized patent attorney firm has established itself as a top choice in Germany for mid-market clients. The practice boasts an excellent reputation for prosecution and litigation regarding mechanical engineering and chemical technologies. When it comes to the extensive activities of the patent attorneys in EPO oppositions, as well as national nullity and infringement suits, electronics and medical devices also play an important role.

One new instruction in the latter, for example, is iCat in a battle over a dental implant scanner. At national courts and the UPC, the firm’s patent attorneys also represent Huliang Bio-Tech in a battle over dental prosthetics. Other recent instructions in revocation proceedings, such as that by CeoTronics concerning cable communication and by OWIM concerning a shoe sole, demonstrate that the patent attorneys now operate across a broad technical spectrum, just like most of their competitors. In such cases, the patent attorneys tend to work with external lawyers, increasingly from large firms such Noerr and Graf von Westphalen.

The expansion of the firm’s litigation practice was underpinned by a strategy of sustained growth. Following the opening of a new office in Münster in 2025, the firm has now focused on expanding its chemical and biotech patent practice by recruiting a partner from another firm in Frankfurt, as well as at associate level. However, the firm has not yet been able to transfer its strong position among mid-market clients into a lively UPC practice, as Thum & Partner or Maikowski & Ninnemen have done. Huliang Bio-Tech is currently the firm’s most prominent client before the European court.

Strengths

Litigation concerning mechanics and mechanical engineering patents.

Recommended individuals

Robin Keulertz (“creative, entrepreneurial and pragmatic advice”, competitor)

Team

23 patent attorneys

Partner moves

Christian Vollmer (from Area)

Clients

Litigation: Eurotronic against ELV Elektronik over a sensor device; Norma against Caillau over joining technology; Urban against Graf concerning a plastics welding machine; CeoTronics against Invisio in nullity suit over a cable communication system; OWIM against GEOX in nullity suit over a shoe sole; iCat against Dentsply Sirona over a dental implant scanner; Huliang Bio-Tech against Ivoclar Vivadent over dental prosthetics. EPO oppositions: Kumiai Chemical Industry against Kenso Agcare over a herbicide; Breyden against Brembo and Volkswagen over a brake disc; OptoTech Optikmaschinen against Satisloh over the manufacture of optical elements; Danfoss against SEW-EURODRIVE over calculating the cyclic lifetime of an electronic device; Maschinenfabrik Bernard Krone against John Deere over agricultural machinery. Frequent oppositions: Fanuc, Panther Packaging, PSA Technology.