JUVE Patent

Hogan Lovells – Netherlands 2022

JUVE Comment

With a strong presence, especially in life sciences cases, Hogan Lovells’ Amsterdam patent team remains an important challenger to the two firms at the top of the Dutch litigation market. The team has been highly active for originator drug manufacturers such as MSD and Bristol-Meyers Squibb, and has very close ties to Eli Lilly – even if the dispute over pemetrexed ended in 2021. The patent team is also involved in one of the most extensive medical products cases in Europe thanks to its work for Meril Life Sciences.

Nevertheless, staff upheaval over the past year means the team is still unable to close the gap to Brinkhof and Hoyng ROKH Monegier at the top of the market. Former lead partner Klaas Bisschop moved to become a judge at the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam, leaving behind “big shoes to fill”, according to some competitors. It is now left to Ruud van der Velden, the youngest of the three partners, to fill this gap, with the support of senior partner Bert Oosting. On the other hand, the firm’s wider European team is strong enough to provide the necessary backup during this transition. That the Amsterdam team includes several highly experienced counsel and associates, some of whom conduct proceedings alone, has provided stability. But if Hogan Lovells is to regain its former clout in the Dutch market, it will have to appoint another partner sooner or later, especially as the next generational change is not far off.

The fact that the staff changes have come just as the UPC gets ready to open its doors should not pose a problem for Hogan Lovells. The remaining partners have handled cases spanning a wide technical spectrum, for instance for Kindermann regarding presentation systems, and for Rhodia regarding earth oxides for exhaust catalysts. In keeping with the overarching orientation of the European team, the Dutch patent litigators have also had a second key focus on mobile communications suits for many years. They are chiefly active on the side of implementers such as Oppo in lawsuits by SEP holders. However, the fact that Oppo chose to rely on competitor Brinkhof for the Dutch proceedings in the major dispute with Nokia, while the German Hogan Lovells team is taking a leading role in defending Oppo against Nokia’s lawsuits in Europe, is a disappointment for the Amsterdam team.


Patent disputes regarding mobile communications and for innovator pharmaceutical companies, including cross-border litigation.

European set-up

Hogan Lovells has a truly cross-border litigation team. Between London, Düsseldorf, Munich and Amsterdam it is homogeneous, something reflected in its international presence in important pharmaceutical, mobile communications and electronics cases. The team is active across borders, for instance, for Apple, Eli Lilly, HTC and Vodafone. The Dutch team in particular is currently involved in cross-border disputes for BMS, MSD, Meril and Oppo.

Hogan Lovells’ European team is present at all relevant UPC locations. In Germany, Hogan Lovells belongs to the leading teams in the market; in France and the UK the firm is a fierce challenger of the market-leading firms. The practice has a smaller, but also very well-established team in Milan. The firm has recently strengthened its practice in Madrid with a second partner promotion.

When it comes to building up a patent attorney practice across Europe, however, main competitor Bird & Bird is ahead; Hogan Lovells only began a few years ago to expand its patent attorney arm in Germany. In some proceedings, such as those for Meril Life Sciences, the Amsterdam team now also works with the German patent attorneys.

One task remains for Hogan Lovells, namely to grow its US presence to secure the current workflow from top-class US clients, even under UPC conditions. Here Hogan Lovells is still ahead of European competitors Bird & Bird and Freshfields in transatlantic work. But recently its US presence suffered somewhat due to departures in the pharma sector, while competitor Allen & Overy invested heavily in its US IP practice.

Recommended individuals

Bert Oosting, Dirk-Jan Ridderinkhof, Ruud van der Velden (“very knowledgeable and down-to-earth advisor”, competitor),


7 lawyers

Partner moves

Klaas Bisschop (to Court of Appeal Amsterdam)


Specialties in the pharmaceutical, medical devices and telecommunications sectors. Coordination of cross-border litigation for a European and global client base. Innovator pharmaceuticals and multi-party disputes. Advice on emerging industries such as biotechnology.


Litigation: Amgen/Shire-NPS (defendant) against Accord regarding cinacalcet patent for parathyroid hormone-level reducer Mimpara, including damages; Bristol-Meyers Squibb (defendant) against Teva in nullity suit regarding apixaban patent for Factor XA inhibitor Eliquis; Bristol-Meyers Squibb (defendant) against Sandoz in PI proceedings regarding apixaban patent for Factor XA inhibitor Eliquis; Bristol-Meyers Squibb (claimant) against various generics regarding claims and European coordination over dasatinib patent for cancer drug Sprycell; Vivoryon (claimant) against Scenic Biotech and others over patents for treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and cancer; Meril Life Sciences and Angiocare (defendant) against Edwards Lifesciences over heart valves; Kindermann (defendant) against Barco regarding presentation systems; Oppo (defendant) against Sharp concerning LTE standards (settled 2021); Floration (claimant) against Royal Flora over technology for flower packaging; Zelig Mappa Farmers (claimant) against Danziger over plant variety for flowers; Rhodia (claimants) against NeoPerformance Materials over earth oxides for exhaust gas catalysts; Solvay (claimant) against Ciner over patent relating to soda ash; Organik Kimya (claimant) against Argon Kimya and Ekkochem regarding abuse of trade secrets over polymeres; frequent litigation for Hoffmann-La Roche and Eli Lilly.