This patent attorney firm is at the top of the market when it comes to major patent disputes before Dutch courts on the patent attorney side. Together with external lawyers its patent attorneys are present in important cases. Ferry van Looijengoed has an outstanding reputation for mobile communication disputes and advises Sisvel and Wiko in such cases. The firm is thus experienced in representing both NPEs and defendants here. Erik Visscher is involved in the Sisvel cases and has a good reputation for AI patents in particular. While mobile communication claims form the most visible part of the firm’s work at present, Arnt Aalbers boasts an excellent reputation for cases concerning mechanical and mechanical engineering patents. Furthermore, in Lilian Hesselink De Vries & Metman has one of the most renowned patent attorneys in its ranks for disputes over pharmaceutical and biotech patents. The firm is also known for its work for Teva. Few Dutch patent attorney firms can boast such technical breadth in disputes.Further Analysis
This patent attorney firm is active in the Dutch litigation market with highly regarded partners Harm van der Heijden and Hans Hutter. Both represent Nokia as co-defendant of KPN in a dispute with Assia over DSL technology. They work with lawyers from Bird & Bird on the case. Thanks largely to these two patent attorneys, NLO has an outstanding reputation for providing technical support in litigation concerning mobile communications and electronics patents. When it comes to pharmaceuticals and biotechnology disputes, however, Mari Korsten is the firm’s figurehead. NLO’s position at the top of the Dutch patent market is not only due to litigation, however. The firm is also respected for its patent filing work. Its number of patent attorneys makes NLO one of the largest practices in the Netherlands. Furthermore, the firm boasts a strong share of international work before the EPO, where it files a large number of patents on behalf of Samsung and Baidu. NLO’s work is on a par with major patent attorney firms in Germany and the UK.Further Analysis
Compared to the market leaders, this patent attorney firm is not seen as often in high-profile disputes when it comes to patent infringement and revocation claims before the Dutch patent courts. But the patent attorneys are visible in some smaller cases, e.g. for Kirenko and Noba. Some of the firm’s individuals still have an outstanding reputation for litigation work. In particular, René Raggers is highly regarded for his technical support and pleadings in life sciences disputes. A competitor recommends him as “first choice in the Netherlands for pharmaceuticals and biotech patents”. Hans Dohmen, an oft-recommended patent attorney in digital communication, recently retired. But even without him as a partner, the firm continues to enjoy a very good reputation in this field.Further Analysis
The Amsterdam patent practice of this truly international IP boutique is one of the market leaders in the Netherlands. Its patent litigators have an outstanding reputation across Europe. Even though veteran Willem Hoyng is withdrawing more and more from active client work, two outstanding litigators have long since followed in his footsteps in Bart van den Broek and Simon Dack. And the firm does not seem to be running out of talent: behind the two lead partners there is a well-established squad of younger litigators, among themTheo Blomme and Peter van Schijndel. This presence in the Dutch market is merely the basis for successful international expansion, with market-leading teams in Amsterdam, Düsseldorf, Munich and Paris. With the German and Dutch litigators having represented ASML and Carl Zeiss in a pan-European suit against Nikon, where the Amsterdam team played a central coordinating role, Hoyng ROKH Monégier is getting set to provide all-round support in other cross-border disputes. The firm most recently handled such cases for Ceva, Philips and a whole host of pharma companies. Across Europe, Hoyng ROKH Monégier has positioned itself clearly on the side of the manufacturing industry and is thus in direct competition with the internationally integrated patent teams of Allen & Overy and Hogan Lovells. This has been well received by clients, with a growing number hiring the firm on a pan-European basis. That is one reason why the firm is thus gaining the competitive edge in the Dutch market. The litigation for ASML against Nikon two years ago is a prime example of this. The dispute was settled in early 2019. But even after this the Amsterdam team enjoyed a broad presence in the highest-profile proceedings before the Dutch patent courts. As in the work for ASML, Philips or Intel, the lawyers are frequently supported by the firm’s patent attorneys. The prosecution team as a whole has a good name in the Netherlands for filing pharma, biotech, chemistry, electronics and mechanical engineering patents. But the individual patent attorneys are rarely recommended for their patent filing work and are hardly visible in the market for EPO oppositions and infringement litigation – the litigaton practice possibly casts too long a shadow here. Thanks to its renowned patent attorney team and especially its impressive presence in cross-border cases, the firm is gradually setting itself apart from the rest of the market.
Vereenigde Octrooibureaux is not only the largest patent filing firm in the Netherlands, it also litigates with a high number of patent attorneys. Like most of its competitors, the firm is involved in mobile communication and pharmaceutical disputes. Currently, the firm represents Assia in a dispute over DSL technology and Eli Lilly concerning the cancer drug pemetrexed. The patent attorneys work beside external lawyers here. Vereenigde Octrooibureaux also enjoys a strong reputation for litigation concerning mechanical patents and boasts two of the leading individuals in the Dutch market here, Bernard Ledeboer and Leo Jessen. Only De Vries & Metman can currently rival the firm’s technical breadth. However, the latter has a higher profile in mobile communication and pharmaceutical disputes.Further Analysis
In this mixed IP firm, patent attorneys make up the majority of fee earners. It is renowned throughout Europe for its prosecution work in electronics, transport, biotechnology, mechanics, process and mechanical engineering. Some patent attorneys, such as Martin Luten, also have an excellent reputation for providing technical support in infringement and revocation proceedings before the Dutch patent courts. One example is the work for Nikon in an extensive battle with ASML over semiconductors, in which the firm worked with Freshfields and Hogan Lovells. The patent attorneys are also heavily involved in EPO disputes. Arnold & Siedsma has its own lawyers that work on soft IP issues, but who also handle small to midsized patent cases. For example, the firm represents Tobrix in a dispute over laser technology and an AV solutions provider in an infringement case without the help of external lawyers. However, the lawyers are not as visible as their counterparts at major Dutch litigation firms. Arnold & Siedsma nevertheless stands out among the strong patent prosecution firms with its mixed approach.Further Analysis
This IP boutique is one of the market leaders for patent disputes in the Netherlands. With partners such as Richard Ebbink and Mark Van Gardingen it has some of the most outstanding litigators on the lawyer side in its ranks. In addition, in Koen Bijvank the firm boasts one of the best-known litigators on the patent attorney side when it comes to biotech disputes and pharma litigation. Bringing the litigation-experienced patent attorney on board three years ago was a step toward transforming the pure law firm into a mixed practice – an experiment that has more than paid off. Koen Bijvank has an excellent reputation for both EPO cases and proceedings before the Dutch patent courts. He now works in cooperation with the lawyers in numerous cases. He was part of the team, for instance, working for Heineken in the global battle with AB InBev over ‘bottle-in-bottle’ technology as lead partner. He also came up trumps for the Broad Institute in the EPO battle over the new CRISPR/Cas9 technology in his signature field of biotech. Bijvank specialises exclusively in disputes – Brinkhof does not offer patent filing. Though Hoyng ROKH Monégier demonstrated how to make the leap to a mixed practice years ago, Brinkhof now showed that the concept can also be transferred to pure litigation work. Brinkhof safeguarded the long-term future of the patent team with a strong squad of young litigators around Daan de Lange, who is highly respected among competitors. Its broad setup and size allow the team to conduct a multitude of proceedings within a broad technical spectrum at once, beyond its specialties in life science and mobile communication disputes. For example, Brinkhof partners were recently active for Belmoca regarding coffee capsules and Carl Zeiss as co-defendant of ASML regarding semiconductors. The firm also advised Tata Steel in a cross-border dispute over coated steel. But Brinkhof mainly owes its outstanding position in the Dutch patent market to its frequent visibility in disputes over mobile communication and pharmaceutical patents, e.g. for Wiko against Philips and for Xiaomi and Oppo against Sisvel in two central telecommunication battles. The firm frequently litigates for Sandoz involving various drugs. With clients such as these, the firm is positioned solidly on the side of implementors in the digital communication field and generic drugs manufacturers, and boasts a wealth of experience defending against patent claims. Although Brinkhof has a reputation as a firm for generics manufacturers, innovators in the pharmaceutical field by no means play a minor role. But there is room for the firm to build its visibility here compared to the other market leader Hoyng ROKH Monégier and some international firms like Hogan Lovells, who have carved out clear positions on the side of originator manufacturers.
With only eleven patent attorneys, Patentwerk is the smallest of the major Dutch patent attorney firms. It is known in the market for its patent filing work, but also has a renowned litigator in Bas Langenhuijsen. Dutch law firms often bring him in for disputes over chemical and especially mechanical patents. Patentwerk is less visible in big-ticket litigation for major industrial corporates; it is recommended rather for its work for SMEs and venture capital investors.Further Analysis
The selection of law firms in the above table reflects the research of the editorial staff at JUVE and is based on interviews with clients, lawyers and academics. It remains a subjective view and implies no disparagement of any firm not mentioned here but which is nevertheless active in this field. The firms are alphabetically listed within the groups.
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
|Provider||Owner of this website|
|Purpose||Saves the visitors preferences selected in the Cookie Box of Borlabs Cookie.|
|Cookie Expiry||1 Year|
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
|Purpose||Cookie by Google used for website analytics. Generates statistical data on how the visitor uses the website.|
|Cookie Expiry||2 Years|
Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.
|Purpose||Used to unblock Facebook content.|
|Purpose||Used to unblock Google Maps content.|
|Cookie Expiry||6 Month|
|Purpose||Used to unblock Instagram content.|
|Purpose||Used to unblock OpenStreetMap content.|
|Cookie Name||_osm_location, _osm_session, _osm_totp_token, _osm_welcome, _pk_id., _pk_ref., _pk_ses., qos_token|
|Cookie Expiry||1-10 Years|
|Purpose||Used to unblock Twitter content.|
|Cookie Name||__widgetsettings, local_storage_support_test|
|Purpose||Used to unblock Vimeo content.|
|Cookie Expiry||2 Years|
|Purpose||Used to unblock YouTube content.|
|Cookie Expiry||6 Month|