JUVE Comment

This Düsseldorf IP boutique had adopted a wait-and-see attitude towards the UPC and refrained from strategic reinforcements or strategic alliances – strategies favoured by firms such as Bardehle Pagenberg and Vossius & Partner respectively, for example. Nevertheless, Wildanger got off to a good start and is currently one of the most active German law firms at the UPC. This success is mainly due to the strong market presence of senior partners such as Peter-Michael Weisse, who Meril Life Sciences, for example, recently consulted as co-counsel to Hogan Lovells for an important case against Edwards Lifesciences at the local division Munich. But a broad range of young and well-established partners also made the initial success possible. The most recent partner appointment of Alexander Wiese stands out here. He acts as lead representative in seven of the firm’s 13 proceedings.

Like in national proceedings, Wildanger always deploys larger teams comprising several partners for UPC cases. The firm is also playing to its strengths in mobile communications cases concerning SEP and FRAND issues. On the plaintiff side, this includes a four-action campaign for Atlas Global against Vantiva Technologies and TP-link over wi-fi technology, as well as defence work for Asus against actions brought by Dolby over video coding and actions brought by Lenovo over mobile communications. In such cases, the lawyers usually work with patent attorney firms such as Bosch Jehle, Cohausz & Florack or Keenway, with which they have long maintained close relationships.

The firm is also well positioned in the healthcare sector with two cases concerning medical devices for Lightguide and Meril Life Sciences. However, the fact that Meril chose Wildanger for its dispute with Edwards Lifesciences is surprising, given that Wildanger recently represented Edwards in a national dispute against Abbott.

The firm’s UPC work, like its national litigation, covers a broad technical spectrum. Nevertheless, two other German boutiques had a more successful UPC start than Wildanger, namely Bardehle Pagenberg and Kather Augenstein – partly because they had invested more actively in their UPC position in advance. Wildanger decided against such measures and instead built up young partners from its own ranks.

Strengths

SEP and FRAND disputes for NPEs as well as implementers in mobile communications.

Recommended individuals

Peter-Michael Weisse (“brings a breath of fresh air and good ideas to cases”, client), Alexander Wiese (“excellent litigator widely experienced in patents”, competitor)

Team

14 lawyers

Clients

Atlas Global against Vantiva Technologies and TP-link over wifi standard; Innovative Sonic Corporation against Motorola/Lenovo over mobile communications; Asus against Lenovo and Motorola over mobile communication standards; Lightguide against Biolitec over Endoluminal laser ablation device; Cupower against Tridonic over LED technology; Meril Life Sciences against Edwards Lifesciences over heart valves; Sotras against Mann + Hummel over filter technology; Troester against KraussMaffei Extrusion over a plastics processing technology (settled in 2024); Ocado against AutoStore over robot-assisted automation systems (settled in 2023); Neo Wireless against Toyota action over connected cars patent (ended 2024).