With a strong presence in pharmaceutical and mobile communication cases, Hogan Lovells’ Amsterdam patent team still operates at the top of the Dutch litigation market, but just behind the two market leaders. Although smaller in partner size than some of its closest competitors, such as Brinkhof and Hoyng ROKH Monégier, what the practice lacks in size it makes up for in clout. For example, in 2019 the team around partners Klaas Bisschop and Bert Oosting was involved for Nikon in one of the country’s – and indeed Europe’s – largest patent disputes against ASML over semiconductors, co-counseling Nikon with Freshfields. It also retains regular work for client MSD in Amsterdam and across its other European offices, as well as in the US and Japan, highlighting the team’s global outlook. The firm’s entire European litigation practice has a strong footprint in dealing with cross-border disputes for manufacturers of originator drugs and biologics. The Amsterdam team plays an important role steering some of Europe’s most prominent disputes together with the Düsseldorf and London offices. Hogan Lovells has long advised in the innovator pharmaceuticals field, highlighted through its pan-European work for Eli Lilly against generic drug manufacturers, such as Sandoz and Teva, including litigation in the Netherlands. But the team is not resting on its laurels when it comes to relying on long-term clients. In 2019 the firm acquired new biotech client Vivoryon as well as Kindermann in proceedings relating to clickshare presentation systems. The practice continues to show its flexibility in handling a variety of patent cases. For BKK and HTC, for example, it is involved in some of the most prominent disputes concerning mobile communication patents before the Dutch courts, including SEPs and FRAND issues. Hogan Lovells also advises HTC from London and Düsseldorf. The European patent team’s ability to generate a multitude of instructions through its strong cross-border links and international reach gives the Dutch arm an edge over international competitors, such as Allen & Overy and Freshfields.
Patent disputes regarding mobile communication and for innovator pharmaceutical companies, including cross-border litigation. Advice to emerging industries such as biotechnology.
Hogan Lovells has a truly cross-border litigation team. Between London, Düsseldorf and Amsterdam the team is homogeneous, something reflected in its international presence in important pharmaceutical, mobile phone and electronics cases. The team is present at all relevant potential UPC locations, although its visibility in Paris has dropped off slightly. Its office distribution indicates that Hogan Lovells is clearly a European market leader. When it comes to building up a patent attorney practice across Europe, however, main competitor Bird & Bird is ahead; Hogan Lovells only began two years ago to expand its patent attorney arm in Germany, but this has not yet reached the Netherlands. In fact, Bird & Bird has a similar setup in the Netherlands, but its Dutch litigators cooperate more frequently with its German patent attorneys in cross-border disputes than those at Hogan Lovells. There is still ample potential for Hogan Lovells’ Dutch and European practices in this regard.
Bert Oosting (“good patent and regulatory advice”, “very impressive in the pharmaceutical field”, competitors), Klaas Bisschop (“excellent service for clients”, “very impressive during pleadings”, competitors)
3 partners, 5 associates, 1 counsel
Specialties in the pharmaceutical, medical devices and telecommunications sector. Coordination of cross-border litigation for European and global client base. Innovator pharmaceuticals and multi-party disputes.
Litigation: Amgen (defendant) against Accord regarding Cincalcet; Eli Lilly (claimant) concerning pemetrexed and tadalafil; MSD against Wyeth/Pfizer relating pneumococcal vaccines; Vivoryon (claimant) against Scenic Biotech and others over patents for treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and cancer; Hoffman-La Roche/Genentech (claimant) against biosimilar competitors over Herceptin; Organik Kimya (defendant) against Dow Chemical Company regarding trade secrets; Kindermann (defendant) against Barco regarding presentation systems; Nikon against ASML/Carl Zeiss concerning semiconductor technology; HTC (defendant) against Philips concerning mobile communications; BKK (defendant) against Sisvel over mobile communication technology (public knowledge).