ARTICLE
9 September 2025

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Comments For LSIPR On Small Molecule Litigation In The UPC

KL
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

Contributor

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer is a world-leading global law firm, where our ambition is to help you achieve your goals. Exceptional client service and the pursuit of excellence are at our core. We invest in and care about our client relationships, which is why so many are longstanding. We enjoy breaking new ground, as we have for over 170 years. As a fully integrated transatlantic and transpacific firm, we are where you need us to be. Our footprint is extensive and committed across the world’s largest markets, key financial centres and major growth hubs. At our best tackling complexity and navigating change, we work alongside you on demanding litigation, exacting regulatory work and complex public and private market transactions. We are recognised as leading in these areas. We are immersed in the sectors and challenges that impact you. We are recognised as standing apart in energy, infrastructure and resources. And we’re focused on areas of growth that affect every business across the world.
Life sciences-related cases started at a low level during the first years of the UPC's existence (about 25% of cases) and focused initially on the medtech sector.
Germany Intellectual Property

Life sciences-related cases started at a low level during the first years of the UPC's existence (about 25% of cases) and focused initially on the medtech sector. However, the UPC is now seeing increased activity relating to small molecule products as well as biosimiliars. In this context, one of our Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer Dusseldorf patent litigation partners, Ina vom Feld, commented for LSIPR (Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review) on a case involving small molecule technology that was recently filed at the UPC.

In UPC sees rising small molecule litigation with Pfizer in the hot seat, vom Feld considers the patent infringement proceedings brought by Enanta Pharmaceuticals against Pfizer at the UPC in relation to Pfizer's COVID-19 antiviral, Paxlovid, which drug Enanta claims infringes its patent across all 18 UPC member states. The case is unusual for featuring innovators on both sides.

The LSIPR article quotes vom Feld view that "The UPC's one-stop-shop character, offering a cost-efficient injunction in a large number of countries in one proceeding, makes it particularly attractive for a 'David vs Goliath' scenario like the present one."

In other comments, vom Feld compares the US litigation between the same parties (in which Enanta's patent was invalidated – Enanta intends to appeal) with the recent EPO decision to grant the European patent, which appears to have encouraged the current proceedings.

However, she highlights that the outcome of the case is not certain; the UPC will acknowledge the EPO's decision but will examine the patent with a fresh perspective. The UPC has a relatively high rate of revocation currently with over 40% of patents invalidated where validity has been in issue in proceedings.

Read the full LSIPR article here.

For more on the UPC and unitary patent see our UPC & UP Hub.

For more on current trends in the UPC, see Trends emerging as the UPC enters its third year.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More