After years of contemplation and delays, Europe’s Unified Patent Court will be operational in about one year. U.S.-based Life Sciences patent applicants should start preparing now to ensure that their applications withstand scrutiny under the new patent court.

Europe is finalizing the establishment of the European Unified Patent Court (UPC). Once in operation, the UPC will be a centralized court devoted to settling patent disputes across Europe. The establishment of the UPC will allow patent owners to enforce European patents (and defendants to challenge them) in a single venue, instead of the current practice of bringing enforcement actions in the courts of each respective European state.  There will be a transitional period during which European patents may be opted-out of UPC jurisdiction. However, all European patents applied for after the transitional period will fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. Of course, courts of a particular country will continue to have jurisdiction over patent applications filed directly in that particular country using the Paris Convention.

Political and constitutional issues in the United Kingdom (i.e., Brexit) and Germany, respectively, have delayed the implementation of the UPC despite its ratification in 2013. These issues have (mostly) been resolved and, as of January 19, 2022, thirteen states have ratified the start of the Provisional Application Period of the UPC agreement. This means the final stages of implementing the UPC may commence (e.g., recruiting judges). Current estimates indicate an official start date of early 2023 with Courts of First Instance in Milan, Munich, Paris, and Stockholm, and a Court of Appeal in Luxembourg.

The establishment of the UPC also means the birth of the Unitary Patent – a single patent that provides uniform patent protection across UPC member states. Once the UPC is official, any European patent granted may become a Unitary Patent upon request. The list of states that will participate in the Unitary Patent once the UPC becomes operational includes Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, and Sweden. Cyprus, Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Poland, Romania, and Slovakia plan on joining shortly thereafter.


An established UPC will make European patents more attractive to U.S.-based applicants and will have practical implications in all fields, including Life Sciences of which there were over 10,000 related applications filed in Europe in 2020. Usually, U.S.-based patent applications are filed in Europe within a year or thirty-one months of their U.S. priority date via the Paris Convention or the Patent Cooperation Treaty, respectively. Chances are applications that are currently being drafted by a U.S.-based applicant will be filed in Europe after the UPC and Unitary Patent are in effect. Care should be taken to ensure these applications are drafted to withstand European scrutiny – especially because this new European patent court will not have settled case law of its own. For example, specifications should be drafted with enough description and support (more than is typically required in the U.S.) to withstand “added matter” rejections. Also, of particular importance to the Life Sciences, applicants should be careful when drafting claims that can be construed as methods of treatment, as such claims are generally prohibited in Europe unless they fall within a specific exception such as the exception for “purpose-limited product” claims. Ensuring that applications meet these and other European patent application thresholds will allow U.S.-based applicants to hit the ground running once the European patent court opens its doors next year.

Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Baldassare Vinti Baldassare Vinti

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti heads Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo’s practice focuses on litigating patent, false advertising, trade secret, life sciences, trademark and contractual matters in federal and state courts and before the International Trade Commission. He is a seasoned trial attorney responsible…

Baldassare (“Baldo”) Vinti heads Proskauer’s Intellectual Property Litigation Group.

Baldo’s practice focuses on litigating patent, false advertising, trade secret, life sciences, trademark and contractual matters in federal and state courts and before the International Trade Commission. He is a seasoned trial attorney responsible for all aspects of litigation, including Markman hearings, appeals before the Federal Circuit, case preparation and strategy, depositions, motion practice, and settlement negotiations. He has represented clients in high-stakes matters involving a broad range of technologies, including medical devices, diagnostics, immunoassays, prosthetics, pharmaceuticals, dental implants, electronic medical records systems, encryption technology, wound dressings, digital video compression, electronic book delivery and security systems, mobile media technologies, navigation and location-based services, bandwidth management, bar code scanning, lasers , and other technologies. Baldo has represented numerous major corporations, including Arkema S.A., British Telecommunications PLC, Church & Dwight Co., Inc., Henry Schein, Inc., Maidenform Brands Inc., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Ossur North America Inc., Panasonic Corp., Sony Corp., Welch Foods, Inc., and Zenith Electronics LLC.

In addition, Baldo regularly handles transactional work, including intellectual property due diligence, licensing, intellectual property structural transactions, patentability studies, infringement/non-infringement opinions, and client counseling in intellectual property matters.

Baldo is an author and frequent commentator on patent issues pertaining to medical devices and a host of other intellectual property topics, and has been quoted in the National Law Journal, Bloomberg BNA, Law360, Westlaw Journal and Inside Counsel magazine. He is also a regular contributor of articles published in Medical Product Outsourcing magazine that deal with the medical device industry.

Baldo served as a judicial intern for Hon. John E. Sprizzo of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and for Hon. Charles A. LaTorella of the New York Supreme Court.