JUVE Patent

AOMB – Netherlands 2022

JUVE Comment

This IP firm, which is dominated by patent attorneys, is best known for its patent prosecution practice which is active across a broad technical spectrum. In particular, René Raggers is highly regarded for his technical support in pharmaceutical and biotech cases. He is specifically brought in by external law firms such as BarentsKrans for Mylan and Insud Pharma. On the other hand, the firm also works for a multitude of small, innovative companies in the same sector. In litigation, the life sciences team also enjoys an excellent reputation for its technical assistance in revocation and infringement proceedings, mainly for generic drug companies such as Mylan.

Mostly, AOMB works for clients of a completely different calibre when it comes to litigation regarding computer and mobile communications patents, with Ericsson one such prestigious name. The firm not only files a great deal of patents for the Swedish network equipment manufacturer, but is also currently litigating for the company in the Dutch SEP proceedings against Apple in cooperation with Taylor Wessing.

The fact that AOMB’s patent attorneys are now all but guaranteed to act in such battles for Ericsson in the Netherlands has lent a real boost to the visibility of lead partner Teun van Berkel. But, unlike market leader De Vries & Metman, the AOMB litigation practice mainly focuses on one single, albeit outstanding, client whereas De Vries & Metman has a much broader client base. Another internationally renowned player that AOMB advises from the electronics sector is Signify.

The firm’s work for the former Philips subsidiary demonstrates AOMB’s philosophy is to remain as close to its local Dutch clients as possible. As such, the firm recently opened a further Dutch office in Utrecht. For this it hired a young lateral from Arnold & Siedsma as senior associate, who is already known for his work in life sciences. But like most European prosecution firms, AOMB also has a very active international client base it advises at the EPO including Ericsson, BE Aerospace and Koito Manufacturing.


Litigation support by patent attorneys in life sciences, especially concerning pharmaceutical and biotech patents.

European set-up

The AOMB patent attorneys are involved in the Dutch proceedings of international pharma cases on the generics side, as well as for Ericsson. For example in the latter’s global SEP battle against Apple. The patent attorneys also run an intensive practice for EPO oppositions.

Outside the Netherlands, AOMB has no other offices in major patent jurisdictions. Unlike other Dutch patent attorney firms, AOMB eschews an office in Munich but has a large presence in Poland. Furthermore, AOMB is allied with other European patent filing firms through the AIPEX network, including strong ties to Prinz & Partner in Germany and Wynne Jones in the UK.

The AIPEX firms are an option for joint activity before the UPC. But AOMB will also continue to run UPC cases together with Dutch lawyers from law firms, as its patent attorneys do already in national proceedings with firms such as Vondst, BarentsKrans and Taylor Wessing. While these firms also work with other Dutch patent attorney firms on a case-by-case basis, so far they have no plans to integrate their own patent attorneys.

Recommended individuals

René Raggers (“excellent litigation skills”, competitor; pharma and biotech); Teun van Berkel (“highly qualified in electronics and telecoms”, competitor; electronics, mobile communications)


25 patent attorneys


Full service in IP with a strong focus on patents. Patent prosecution in a broad field of technologies with focuses on life sciences, electronics, computers, mechanics and transport. Plant breeders’ rights. Also EPO disputes and revocation cases. Infringement disputes with external lawyers.


Litigation: Ericsson (claimant) against Apple over SEPs, including 5G; Barco (claimant) against competitors regarding electronic communication tool for meetings; Mylan/Viatris (defendant) against Novartis in PI proceedings regarding SPC for multiple sclerosis drug fingolimod (all public knowledge); Insud Pharma (claimant) in nullity case against Galenicum patent for pharmaceutical compositions of anti-diabetic drug sitagliptin; Kiremko (defendant) against Tomra in infringement and revocation cases, as well as EPO oppositions over steam-peeling technology. Prosecution: patent filing for Additive Industries, BE Aerospace, Engie, Ericsson, Koito Manufacturing, Lumicks, Marel Group, Nrcadia, Nexperia, Oncode, OncoSignal, Prysmian, Philips Group, Rockwell Collins, Sabic, Signify, Tespra, technical universities of Eindhoven and Delft, University of Maastricht, Vanderlande, VDL Group (some public knowledge).


The Hague, Arnhem, Eindhoven, Maastricht