The well-positioned patent litigation team of this national full-service firm is well known in the Netherlands for pharmaceutical disputes. In the past twelve months, it has showcased its broad technical setup better than ever before. Going against the market trend towards fewer mobile communications suits, proceedings on the implementor side made up a larger portion of NautaDutilh’s activity. Until now, competitors have not thought the team capable of playing a weightier role in SEP suits. But with clients like Wiko and other Asian mobile communications manufacturers, the NautaDutilh practice has proven them wrong.
One significant case was a high-stakes dispute involving solar technology for a leading manufacturer. Cases like these, but also the mobile communications suits, show that the NautaDutilh team is indeed a serious competitor to Brinkhof when it comes to handling cross-border cases in cooperation with other national IP boutiques or teams from national full-service firms.
It is mainly thanks to the excellent reputation of frontwoman Anne Marie Verschuur that the team makes itself a candidate for such work time and again. But because it has not grown lately and pursues a one-partner approach, the team remains limited in terms of handling more complex, more international cases. The firm will also need to establish another partner if it is to have more freedom to move in the market. That would seem a good idea in order to offer strong young talent further prospects in the firm, but in particular if the UPC does indeed launch and the team wants to play a central role at the new court.
Traditionally, the growth opportunities for IP teams in national full-service firms like NautaDutilh are limited, as they largely depend on the development of the other practices – this is especially the case when it comes to decisions about new IP partners.
Patent litigation with a broad technical focus, especially regarding life sciences patents.
Unlike other national full-service teams such as BarentsKrans, NautaDutilh has international IP teams in Brussels and Luxembourg. In France, Germany, Italy and the UK, it relies on cooperation partners. But like all patent teams in national full-service firms, it will have to coordinate within the firm as a whole if it wants to enter into more exclusive cooperations with other European teams for cross-border cases. There might be more need for this now as the launch of the UPC has recently become more certain again. But also independently from the UPC this could be a winning strategy, as the NautaDutilh team has been more visible in cross-border disputes lately.
Now as the UPC comes closer again, NautaDutilh could well be an attractive partner to national full-service firms as well as IP boutiques in Germany and the UK – simply because there are not enough stand-alone partner firms in the Netherlands with litigators of Verschuur’s calibre.
Anne Marie Verschuur (“canny IP lawyer”, competitor)
1 partner, 4 associates, 2 of counsel
Patent litigation and transactional work with a focus on the life sciences sector. Trade secret advice and licence agreements.
Litigation: Wiko (defendant) against Sisvel over mobile communication patents; Leadd (claimant) against Bayer in dispute over technology agreement and payments including patent issues; Heraeus against Zimmer Biomet in technology and trade secret dispute over bone cement; manufacturer (defendant) against competitor over solar technology; pharmaceutical research institute regarding entitlement action and parallel import. Advice: frequent advice to Gadeta and Aseptix Health Services regarding licensing projects; Ginkgo Bioworks on transactions; Sanofi on public bid for takeover of Kiadis Pharma; Olympus Winter & Ibe on takeover of Quest Photonic Devices.