JUVE Comment

Recently this market-leading litigation practice of the global litigation firm made impressive strides in patent litigation related to mobile communications and medical devices. For a long time, the strong activity in the mobile communications sector – regarding both implementation and standard essential patents – for key clients such as Google and Qualcomm dominated. The relatively new instruction from Netflix in a case concerning video streaming has also grown into a highly extensive litigation series and is currently keeping the team very busy. However, the increasingly intensive support of Dexcom in the global battle against Abbott over glucose-monitoring technology shows that the German team has long since emancipated itself from its former dominant focus on mobile communication cases. However, the work of the team around lead partner Marcus Grosch on classic pharmaceuticals and biologics cases cannot currently compete with other German market leaders such as Freshfields and Hogan Lovells in this field.

In contrast, the increasing presence of younger litigators is a success. Behind the dominant Grosch and Johannes Bukow, the younger partners Jérôme Kommer and Jesko Preuß have successfully established themselves in recent years. Now the next generation is stepping into the limelight with Andreas Duensing.

European set-up

Quinn Emanuel is more successful than any other US firm in transferring major cases across the Atlantic to litigate them before the German courts and the UPC. Dexcom and Tesla are two examples. The German team is currently representing the car manufacturer in national as well as UPC proceedings against Broadcom. The litigation for Dexcom in its major global battle with Abbott is probably the biggest instruction for the German team at present and is a prime example of the team’s litigation before German courts, the UPC and in EPO proceedings. Quinn Emanuel also plays an important role in the coordination of such international disputes.

With these instructions and further proceedings on the defendant side for Google and Vizgen, the law firm gained a good toehold at the UPC right from the start. However, Quinn Emanuel is currently unable to handle such cases in other European countries, working instead with local lawyers from other outfits. The firm still does not – or does not manage to – build up teams in London or Paris, for example, to the same calibre as the German practice in terms of market position and profitability. The lack of presence in other European patent jurisdictions is what differentiates the firm from market-leading European practices such as Hogan Lovells or Bird & Bird. The latter can draw on the full potential of several renowned teams in various European jurisdictions in pan-European pharma litigation.

Strengths

Litigation related to telecoms and medical divices. Opposition and nullity suits by lawyers without patent attorneys. Strong US practice.

Recommended individuals

Johannes Bukow (“outstanding and seasoned litigator”, competitor), Andreas Duensing (“very efficient lawyer”, client), Marcus Grosch (“efficiently guides cases by hitting the nail on the head”, client; “impressive litigator”, competitor), Jérôme Kommer (“simply top”, competitor), Jesko Preuß

Team

43 lawyers

Clients

Litigation: Dexcom against Abbott over glucose-monitoring patents; Tesla against Broadcom/Avago over implementation patent for mobile communications; Netflix against Broadcom and DiVX over video streaming; Niantic against K.Mizra over near-field communication regarding video game Pokémon Go; Voxer against Facebook over live-streaming technology; Bio-Rad against 10x Genomics over gene-sequence analysis; Hansa Biopharma against Genovis over patent regarding IgG antibodies; frequent litigation for Qualcomm, Google, IP Bridge, IPCom. Advice: European car manufacturers and international IoT company regarding SEPs.