JUVE Comment

If there is one criticism to be made of this market-leading Dutch patent litigation firm, it is that, after having positioned new young talent in the market many years in a row, it failed to do this in 2024. Otherwise, the Amsterdam IP boutique has had a successful year, including its activities at the UPC.

The firm is still more present in national cases than most of its Dutch competitors. The team around Daan de Lange, Koen Bijvank and Mark Van Gardingen represented generic drug and biosimilar manufacturers in various disputes. This includes important work on high-profile cases for Sandoz against Bayer over Xarelto and for Stada against Bristol-Myers Squibb over apixaban. Bijvank remains a key figure in EPO proceedings concerning CRISPR-Cas technology. Thus patent holders and innovators in the pharma and biotech sectors such as The Broad Institute, Amgen, and Novartis trust in the firm.

In contrast to the life sciences sector, there was limited activity in national mobile communication cases after client Oppo settled a major dispute with Nokia in 2024. Much work here, for example for regular client Oppo, is currently shifting to the UPC.

Experienced young litigators such as Rien Broekstra, Jan Pot and Alexander de Leeuw stand Brinkhof in good stead, but in 2024, for the first time in a long time, no new hopeful appeared on the horizon. Therefore, the partners should not wait too long before bringing the next generation into the spotlight. The ability to promote young talent in quick succession and thus operate with an impressive squad of renowned litigators distinguishes Brinkhof and competitor Hoyng ROKH Monegier from the rest of the Dutch market.

European set-up

Brinkhof’s ambitions now lie with the UPC and younger partners are increasingly taking on more responsibility. Brinkhof bundles its UPC activities with Vossius & Partner in mixed teams under the brand Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators. Laywers from both firms are representing Oppo in three suits filed by Panasonic at the local division Mannheim. They also represented CCV Group as co-defendants of Verifone in two suits brought by Nokia. Broekstra also represented Ballinno in a dispute with Kineox over the use of VAR technology for the Uefa European Championships 2024. Under the brand Vossius & Brinkhof UPC Litigators, de Lange and de Leeuw are leading a claim for Agfa against Gucci at the Hamburg local division.

Even if it is not always clear to outsiders whether the Vossius or Brinkhof lawyers are leading the cases, through their joint work the Brinkhof lawyers are currently involved in more UPC cases than their Dutch competitors. Amgen, for example, also retained Bijvank. He took over the lead role from df-mp in a revocation action brought by Sanofi and Regeneron against an Amgen blockbuster patent. He is also representing Amgen as co-counsel to Bardehle in two infringement claims with Sanofi. Vossius lawyers are not involved.

Strengths

Patent litigation with a mixed approach concerning mobile communications, pharma and biotech.

Recommended individuals

Koen Bijvank (“makes the difference in the courtroom but also when negotiating settlements”, competitor; also qualified as patent attorney; pharma and biotech), Rien Broekstra, Richard Ebbink (“still the best Dutch patent litigator”, competitor), Rik Lambers, Daan de Lange (“excellent lawyer, always a pleasure to work with on cases”, competitor), Alexander de Leeuw (“very proactive lawyer, easy to work with”, competitor), Jan Pot (“strong litigation skills, very good advice in technically complex proceedings”, competitor), Mark Van Gardingen (“outstanding, no matter what the technology in dispute is”, competitor)

Team

22 lawyers (of whom two are dual qualified), 1 patent attorney

Clients

Litigation: HighPoint against KPN and Nokia regarding UMTS standards; The Broad Institute in EPO proceedings concerning CRISPR-Cas; Oppo against Nokia in infringement and nullity cases over 5G, including FRAND (settled 2024); Sandoz against Bayer over anticoagulent rivaroxaban/Xarelto; Sandoz against Biogen in nullity case over multiple sclerosis drug dimethylfumarate/Tecfidera; Stada against Bristol-Myers Squibb regarding blood-clot drug apixaban/Eliquis; Synthon against Teva over MS drug Copaxone; frequent litigation for Accord; Zuru/Tinnus against Koopman in infringement and nullity suit over filling technology for water balloons; Tata Steel against ArcelorMittal regarding patent for the production of coated steel strips; EPO oppositions for The Broad Institute and Delta Electronics.