JUVE Comment

As an independent IP litigation boutique and leading national player in Germany, the Düsseldorf IP firm has established a growing presence at the UPC. In the court’s early days, it primarily represented medium-sized companies at the local divisions in Düsseldorf and Munich. Over the past twelve months, its litigators have continued to operate across a broad technical spectrum on the defence side, representing clients such as XSYS in printing technology matters, Knaus Tabbert in caravan disputes, and ILME in electronic connector cases. More recently, the partners have appeared more frequently for claimants, such as Leap Tools concerning simulation AI for furnishings, and Igus against a Chinese competitor regarding a trade fair seizure over power cable ducts.

However, almost two years passed before the firm became active in its traditional stronghold of electronics and mobile communications at the UPC. Many competitors had expected Rospatt to secure UPC instructions in these sectors much earlier. The breakthrough came in early 2025 with the major dispute between Samsung and ZTE over a global SEP portfolio licence, with Rospatt handling active infringement claims alongside A&O Shearman against the Chinese competitor at both the UPC and national courts. A second instruction from the Korean core client followed for defence against an NPE suit over computer security technology. However, the firm’s current largest case relates to chemicals, assisting BASF in a revocation case concerning sandwich panels for buildings.

Initially, Rospatt took a more cautious approach to the UPC compared to similarly structured competitors such as Kather Augenstein and Bardehle Pagenberg, which established strong positions in electronics and mobile communications cases from the outset. With more high-value cases such as BASF and Samsung, Rospatt is now steadily closing this gap. The firm could gain significant ground over its competitors if its high-profile pharmaceutical originator clients begin to utilise the UPC more frequently for litigation against generics or biosimilar manufacturers. The partners’ established practice of working together on instructions prior to the UPC’s launch, and their consistent collaboration with external patent attorney firms such as Zimmermann & Partner (for Samsung) and dompatent (for ILME), could prove advantageous in this regard.

Strengths

UPC litigation for innovative midsized companies. Mobile communication cases.

Recommended individuals

Markus Lenßen (“very experienced, brilliant technical understanding”, competitor), Henrik Timmann

Team

15 lawyers

Clients

Samsung Electronics against ZTE over telecommunications; Samsung Electronics against Fingon over computer security; BASF against Huntsman over sandwich panels for cooling; Knaus Tabbert against Yellow Sphere Innovations over caravans; XSYS Germany against Esko Prepress over printing technology; Q-Tech as co-defendant of EJP Maschinen GmbH against MSG Maschinenbau over measurement technology; Wittenstein against Vestas over wind turbines (public knowledge); Igus against Whale Technology over power cable ducts for buildings; Leap Tools against Wizart over simulation AI for furnishings; ILME against Phoenix Contact over electrical controller (settled 2025).