JUVE Patent

CMS Cameron McKenna – UK 2021

JUVE Comment

The well-positioned London team fosters a mixed approach, with solicitors and patent attorneys represented to an equal degree, although these operate in two different branches of the firm. The litigation practice has a strong focus on pharma disputes, where it frequently brings its expertise in SPC advice and regulatory into play, for example in disputes with the European Medicines Agency over the licensing of medicines. The team around Gareth Morgan worked exclusively for generics manufacturers before now, but recently won a notable originator as a new client. CMS is also gaining a foothold in the tech sector, for example conducting infringement proceedings for Clearswift.

Although the UK practice has not yet been active in mobile communications disputes, it does have a basis for more activity in this sector. On the one hand, notable technology and energy companies rely on CMS for matters relating to the protection of secrets or FTO analyses. On the other, the patent attorneys are very active for LinkedIn and Microsoft in patent prosecution. Moreover, they conduct oppositions at the EPO for various tech companies. The German CMS lawyers also call on the technical expertise of the London patent attorneys, for instance while representing Jinko in the infringement proceedings against Hanwha Q-Cells. However, CMS is still some way from enjoying the kind of pan-European cooperation seen in fully integrated teams like Bird & Bird.


Life sciences, particularly biotech cases and regulatory work. Technical patent cases. Patent filing regarding digital communication and computer technology.

European strategy

With offices in all of the important UPC locations, the firm has a good setup for the European patent court, even if the individual teams are not at the top of the market in each country. The firm’s work on integrating the CMS network over the past few years has been slow to bear fruit, and its patent attorneys and litigators are not yet fully integrated. They are, however, beginning to work together more often. Various CMS offices, for example, are conducting numerous proceedings against competitors for Leifheit. Several CMS offices have been hired by Strix for a dispute involving kettles.

Within the CMS network, the firms also make use of the services of the patent prosecution practice which was part of Olswang in London. This is now a subsidiary of the UK CMS firm, operating under CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang. The prosecution practice has been through some changes, however. CMS closed the Olswang office in Munich and for efficiency reasons relocated all patent prosecution activities to London, including a German patent attorney.

Recommended individuals

Gareth Morgan


3 partners, 8 associates. Patent prosecution: 20 patent attorneys


A combination of patent litigation for tech and life sciences, and broad patent prosecution practice in its London office, with slightly more emphasis on prosecution.


Litigation: Sandoz (claimant) against Warner-Lambert over Pregabalin; Jinko Solar (defendant) against Q-Cells over solar technology; Clearswift (claimant) against Glasswall over email security software; Estar (defendant) against Regen over blood plasma; Vectura (defendant) in EPO opposition against GSK over drug for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); Kymab in EPO opposition and appeal against Regeneron (public information). Patent prosecution: patent filing for Cambridge Quantum Computing, Imagination Technologies, LinkedIn, Microsoft, Kymab, Foundation Medicine, Snipr Technologies, Universal Electronics.