JUVE Comment

This well-known Düsseldorf IP litigation firm has established a solid presence at the new court. It mainly represents medium-sized companies at the local divisions in Düsseldorf and Munich. Rospatt’s experienced litigators operate across a broad, but rather classic, technical spectrum on the defendant side, for example for Knaus Tabbert over caravans, XSYS over printing technology, Q-Tech over measurement technology, and Industria Lombarda Materiale Elettrico over electrical controllers.

The firm has not yet had a chance to prove itself at the UPC in its traditional strengths of electronics and mobile communications, partly because one of its most important clients, Samsung Electronics, has so far relied on A&O Shearman and Hoyng ROKH Monegier to defend it against mobile communications actions at the UPC. Nevertheless, Rospatt is involved in proceedings for AIM Sport against Supponor over electronic perimeter advertising in sports stadiums. Alongside other law firms Rospatt recently won a case for this client concerning the admissibility of opt-outs of European patents during the transitional period at the Court of Appeal.

Rospatt’s strategy so far has been to neutrally inform clients about the possible risks of litigation in the early phase of a new court. As a result, many of its regular clients, particularly in the life sciences sector, are still taking a wait-and-see approach to the UPC. This has led to Rospatt having a more cautious position than that of competitors with a similar setup, such as Kather Augenstein or Powell Gilbert. However, this could soon change if Rospatt’s high-profile pharmaceutical originator clients start using the UPC more for litigation against generics or biosimilar manufacturers.

Strengths

UPC litigation for innovative midsized companies.

Recommended individuals

Markus Lenßen (“very much positively impressed by his UPC work”, client), Henrik Timmann (“extremely professional, a good overview of all his cases and their details”, client)

Team

9 lawyers

Clients

AIM Sport Vision against Supponor over electronic perimeter advertising in sports stadiums; Knaus Tabbert against Yellow Sphere Innovations over caravans; XSYS against Esko over printing technology; I.L.M.E. against Phoenix Contact over electrical controller; Q-Tech as co-defendant of EJP Maschinen GmbH against MSG Maschinenbau over measurement technology.