On Thursday 6 March 2025, Mathys & Squire hosted Roma Agrawal MBE, prominent engineer and advocate for women in science, in our London office, in honour of International Women’s Day this weekend.

Roma Agrawal is a structural engineer who has worked with signature architects to design a wide range of important structures, from bridges to skyscrapers. Most famously, as part of her fourteen-year career, she spent six years working on our office’s building, the Shard, designing the foundation and the ‘Spire.’

She is also an author and a broadcaster with five published books and her own podcast, Building Stories. Cited as “the new voice of women talking about science […] and making it cool” by the Telegraph, she imparts her knowledge of the structures around us. Her first book, Built: The Hidden Stories Behind Our Structures, looks at the broad, and often unexpected, impact of engineering and architecture on humanity, whilst How Was That Built?: The Stories Behind Awesome Structures is one of her illustrated books aimed at younger readers, illuminating the engineering ingenuity behind famous landmarks.

Through her platforms, and talks at universities, schools and other organisations, she hopes to inspire everyone to be curious about the world around them, as well as raise awareness for engineering and technical careers among young people, particularly those from underrepresented groups.

Roma Agrawal speaking in The Shard today

Roma gave a talk which covered a fascinating range of topics: from the large, delving into the science behind the tallest building in Western Europe, to the very small, revealing how something as seemingly inconsequential as a spring allowed us to measure time.

Calling attention to International Women’s Day, Roma shared the story of the inspiring woman behind the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge, Emily Roebling. She then discussed how her gender impacted her own career, talking about the lack of awareness of women in engineering, as well as the difficulties she faced due to being one of only a few women on the Shard building site.

You can read more about Roma Agrawal on her website here

Mathys & Squire Associate Emma Pallister has been featured in The Trademark Lawyer Magazine with her article, ‘The rise of influencer marketing and IP implications’.

An recent article by Associate Emma Pallister has been published in The Trademark Lawyer Magazine titled ‘The rise of influencer marketing and IP implications’. In this piece, Emma discusses the increased consumer trust of influencers, IP risks for brands, influencer liability and the prevalence of counterfeit goods online.

To read the article in full, click the link here.

Commentary by Managing Associate Adam Gilbertson has been featured in The Global Legal Post, Solicitor’s Journal and The Trademark Lawyer as he responds to the latest UK Government AI Consultation regarding the implications of marking AI generated content.

Read the extended press release below.

Will the UK Government mandate that AI users mark their content as AI generated?

The UK Government should seriously consider mandating AI users to mark their content as AI generated says leading property law firm Mathys & Squire in response to the UK’s consultation on AI consultation that closes on February 25.

In December 2024 the UK Government launched a consultation on how copyright law should be changed to take into account the rise in Gen-AI (Copyright and Artificial Intelligence). The document asks for readers’ advice on whether AI material should be flagged as being created by AI – and whether the Government should be responsible for regulating that.

Currently, there is no obligation for material generated using artificial intelligence to be marked as such.

Adam Gilbertson, Managing Associate at Mathys & Squire, says that “As content generated using Gen-AI becomes increasingly indistinguishable from genuine manmade material, in many cases it’s in the public interest to know what material has been generated by AI so that they can make a properly informed opinion about that material.”

That applies to a whole range of content from Gen-AI created reports, articles and newspaper stories through to Gen-AI images, and not just for copyright purposes but for wider authenticity and bias concerns.

UK Government must balance responsibly to protect copyright holders with need to drive AI R&D in the UK

In the Copyright and Artificial Intelligence consultation, the Government indicates that it favours an ‘opt-out’ model of making copyrighted material unavailable for AI training, similar to the EU’s current text and data mining (TDM) exception. This would mean copyrighted material can be used for training AI for commercial purposes unless the copyright owner makes it clear (in some way) that they have ‘reserved their rights’ to such material.

Adam Gilbertson says that this is a sensible middle ground that should help ensure that content creators can seek fair remuneration for use of their copyright protected works whilst providing a safe harbour for AI developers, helping to make the UK a welcoming environment for AI R&D without too much red-tape.

Government must standardise how copyright holders opt-out from AI models training on their data

Adam Gilbertson also recommends that the Government should standardise the way in which copyright holders opt-out of such an exception and reserve their rights to help avoid potential disputes over what material is and is not available for commercial use.

Says Adam Gilbertson: “There is a big question mark over how to implement such an opt out in practice to avoid confusion over what material is and is not freely available for use. Lessons should be learnt from the uncertainty and disputes that have arisen in the EU over what counts as a valid opt-out of the EU’s TDM exception due to a lack of standardisation. If the UK goes down this route, some form of standardisation would help provide greater legal certainty and make it easier for AI companies to operate in the UK.”

We are proud to announce that Mathys & Squire is sponsoring the ‘Hard Tech Investment of the Year’ award at this year’s UKBAA Angel Investment Awards. Partner Andrew White will also be acting as a judge for this year’s nominations.

On Thursday 10 July 2025, The UK Business Angels Association will be hosting their annual Angel Investment Awards. The UKBAA is the national trade association for angel and early-stage investment. Their goal is to underpin a far-reaching, yet deeply connected community of investors which supports cutting-edge entrepreneurs across the UK. The awards will highlight the impact of angel investors, crowd funders and early-stage VCs who are helping to drive innovation, as well as the businesses which they champion.

For the 2025 presentation, Mathys & Squire will be sponsoring the ‘Hard Tech Investment of the Year’ Award. This specific award celebrates the founders and early-stage investors leading the way in research-intensive and capital-intensive sectors such as health and life sciences, and engineering and manufacturing.

Partner Andrew White, who is committed to engaging with and mentoring start-ups, will be part of the judging panel helping to choose the recipients of this year’s awards across the 14 different categories.

Do you want to nominate someone you admire for the 2025 UKBAA Angel Investment Awards? You can apply now on their website here. Applications will close on the 28^th March.

Find out more about the event and award nominations on their website here.

You can learn about the partnership between our Scaleup quarter and the UKBAA here.

We are delighted to share that we have appointed two new Diversity and Inclusion Partners to chair our D&I Committee.

Partners Andrea McShane and Nicholas Fox have been appointed as the new Diversity and Inclusion Partners to lead our D&I committee. Throughout the year, they will be involved in championing diversity internally, externally and at Board level, ensuring that we foster a culture of equality throughout everything that we do.

Partner Andrea McShane writes: “It is such a privilege to be involved in fostering diversity and inclusivity at Mathys & Squire. So much great work has been focussed on establishing a robust framework at Mathys & Squire for ensuring diversity and inclusivity. Our commitment to D&I is a central aspect of who we are and how we strive for excellence. Some of the key competences that we strengthen with our policies – cultural intelligence, a learning mindset, flexibility, collaboration, empathy, curiosity and humility – are also key to providing great professional services. As part of my D&I Partner role I spearhead continued evolution of the firm’s strategy. I champion initiatives that enrich and create opportunities. I engage with stakeholders, monitor developments and welcome opportunities to grow our commitment to diversity and inclusivity.“

Partner Nicholas Fox writes: “Diversity and inclusion is such an integral part of the culture here at Mathys & Squire, and it is therefore a pleasure to be actively involved in the establishment and reinforcement of our initiatives as we enter the new year. To effectively support the talent and technical expertise that we are fortunate enough to have here at Mathys & Squire, it is crucial that we create a positive foundation for all that will enable our staff to thrive at work. Not only will this encourage us to serve our clients to the best of our ability, but it also means that everyone will be able to succeed in their personal and professional goals at the firm. In my role as D&I officer, I will continue to take real action towards the implementation of our policies, both internally and externally, and champion the complete integration of all those that work at Mathys & Squire.”

Looking back on her time as Diversity and Inclusion Officer, previous D&I Partner Caroline Warren reflects on the importance and personal highlights of the role.

Partner Caroline Warren writes: “Mathys & Squire has long recognised the importance of Diversity and Inclusion to the firm as well as to the wider profession and I have enjoyed my time leading and developing the D&I group within Mathys & Squire over the past few years. I have learnt a lot from the talks and discussions that we have organised and I have enjoyed celebrating the awareness days and months that we have marked as a firm. I am pleased to be handing on the role to Andrea and Nicholas and look forward to continuing to support the development of D&I within the firm.”

Diversity and Inclusion is an extremely important part of Mathys & Squire. We are committed to fostering a culture of equality, diversity and inclusion, to sustain Mathys & Squire as a welcoming workplace for all of our employees and partners to be a part of.

Find out more about our Diversity and Inclusion policies and framework here.

Mathys & Squire Managing Associate Lionel Newton has recently been interviewed by International Aquafeed Magazine and provided commentary on various issues relating to intellectual property (IP) and trends in the aquaculture industry.

The aquaculture industry is a rapidly evolving sector that generates a wide range of complex innovations. These advancements include cutting-edge technology designed to improve farming practices, enhance disease prevention and control, and optimise, food formulations through the development of specialised additives.

As the industry continues to progress, the protection of these innovations becomes increasingly important. Intellectual Property rights play a crucial role in safeguarding the research, technology, and developments that drive the sector forward, ensuring that innovators can benefit from their contributions and maintain a competitive edge.

In recognition of the significance of IP in aquaculture, Managing Associate Lionel Newton was recently featured in an article on this topic in International Aquafeed, a leading industry magazine. His insights highlight the challenges and opportunities surrounding IP protection in the sector, offering valuable perspectives for businesses and researchers in this field.

To read the article in full, click the link here.

Mathys & Squire is delighted to announce that our trademark team has been recommended in the 2025 edition of the World Trademark Review (WTR) 1000 guide. Partners Gary Johnston, Rebecca Tew and Helen Cawley and Consultant Margaret Arnott all featured as Recommended Individuals.

The WTR 1000 directory illustrates the depth of expertise available to clients, serving as the definitive tool for those seeking outstanding trademark services worldwide. Now in its 15th year, the WTR 1000  has firmly established itself as the definitive ‘go-to’ resource for those seeking stellar trademark expertise and partners worldwide. Mathys & Squire has been recommended for its work in the trademark field, specifically in the ‘prosecution and strategy’ category. “Mathys & Squire are incredibly easy to work with. The team possess extensive knowledge in all aspects of trademark law, ensuring an exceptionally effective and efficient A-to-Z service.”

Alongside our firm ranking, Consultant Margaret (recommended in the categories of ‘Enforcement & Litigation’ and ‘Prosecution & Strategy’), Helen (recommended in the category of ‘Prosecution & Strategy’), Gary (recommended in the category of ‘Prosecution & Strategy’) and Rebecca (recommended in the category of ‘Prosecution & Strategy), have received the following testimonials:

“Helen Cawley adeptly manages a wide range of instructions. She draws on two decades of experience to provide insightful and proactive advice that helps clients align their trademark strategies with their commercial goals. Cawley’s strategic vision and dedication are poised to make a significant impact on the team and its clients.“

Gary Johnston is “an agile practitioner who seamlessly integrates legal insights with commercial acumen, crafting practical solutions that achieve outstanding results. He recently represented the John Cotton Group in successfully opposing the registration of the mark ‘SNUGGLEMORE’, utilising their established rights in the mark and affirming its reputation and goodwill.“

Rebecca Tew “excels in devising and implementing effective protection and enforcement strategies. She adeptly tailors her approach to meet the unique needs of each client, whether a start-up or a multinational corporation, consistently delivering exceptional service. “

Margaret Arnott “navigates both contentious and non-contentious waters with finesse. Always practical and sensible, she has a knack for crafting business-friendly solutions to any challenge that comes her way.”

We would like to thank each of our clients, contacts and peers who took the time to participate in the research. For more information and to see the full WTR 1000 rankings, please click here.

The UK’s deep tech sector is a rapidly evolving landscape that thrives on ground breaking scientific and engineering advancements. From quantum computing to advanced semiconductor technologies, deep tech companies are driving innovation and reshaping industries. However, while technological breakthroughs are the foundation of deep tech, intellectual property (IP) plays a crucial role in safeguarding innovations, attracting investment, and ensuring commercial viability. This evolving landscape is explored in greater detail in the Royal Academy of Engineering’s State of UK Deep Tech 2024 report.

Despite its strong foundation, the UK’s deep tech sector faces several challenges that could hinder its long-term success:

• Insufficient Public and Private R&D Investment: While government funding supports deep tech research, better alignment with private sector investment is needed to drive commercialisation.
• Lack of Investor Technical Expertise: A shortage of UK-based investors with deep technical knowledge makes it difficult for deep tech startups to secure informed and strategic backing.
• Challenges in Academic-Industry Collaboration on IP: Universities play a key role in IP generation, but rigid IP agreements can hinder spinout success, requiring more flexible frameworks.
• Limited Access to Infrastructure and Talent: A shortage of affordable lab space, advanced manufacturing facilities, and skilled professionals presents significant barriers to scaling deep tech companies.

The Deep Tech Investment Landscape

According to the Royal Academy of Engineering’s State of UK Deep Tech 2024 report, UK deep tech companies have consistently attracted substantial venture capital (VC) investment. Since 2020, the sector has annually secured over £5 billion in VC funding, with healthcare and artificial intelligence gaining the most investment. However, despite this promising trend, the UK still faces significant challenges in scaling deep tech ventures, particularly when compared to the US. One of the key reasons for this is the complex and capital-intensive nature of deep tech, which requires long-term financial backing and industry-specific expertise from investors.

The UK’s venture capital ecosystem has seen an increasing presence of nontraditional investors, including corporate venture capital (CVC) firms and sovereign wealth funds. With 32.5% of UK deep tech VC deals involving no UK investors in early 2024, it is evident that global players recognise the immense potential of the sector. Nevertheless, a gap remains in the availability of UK-based investors with the technical knowledge necessary to evaluate and support deep tech ventures effectively.

Intellectual Property as a Competitive Moat

One of the defining characteristics of deep tech companies is their reliance on strong IP protection. Unlike conventional tech startups that often focus on software solutions with lower barriers to entry, deep tech ventures require significant investment in research and development (R&D) before they can bring products to market. As a result, patents, trade secrets, or other proprietary technologies become invaluable assets that distinguish these companies from their competitors and provide protection on the market.

A well-established IP portfolio serves several strategic purposes:

• Attracting Investors: Investors are more likely to back companies with clear IP ownership, as it mitigates risks associated with replication and competition.
• Facilitating Commercialisation: Patents and trade marks enable companies to license technology, form strategic partnerships, and create monetisation opportunities.
• Strengthening Market Position: Proprietary technologies provide companies with a sustainable competitive advantage, making it difficult for rivals to replicate their innovations.

The UK’s deep tech sector benefits from a strong academic foundation, with universities playing a crucial role in IP generation. However, balancing academic innovation with commercial scalability requires carefully structured IP agreements. Traditionally, UK universities have held significant equity stakes in spinouts, but recent trends indicate a shift toward more investor-friendly policies, allowing startups to retain greater control over their IP.

Challenges in Scaling Deep Tech and IP Management

Despite the clear advantages of IP protection, deep tech companies face several hurdles in managing and leveraging their intellectual assets:

1. Complex Patent Landscapes: Navigating the patent process is time-consuming and expensive, requiring expertise to avoid infringement and ensure broad protection.
2. Funding Gaps for Early-Stage IP Development: Many deep tech startups struggle with securing funds to file and maintain patents before achieving profitability.
3. International Competition and IP Theft: Given the global nature of deep tech, UK firms must contend with IP risks from international competitors, particularly in strategic industries like semiconductors and AI.

The UK has a strong foundation in deep tech innovation, but unlocking its full potential requires a more sophisticated approach to intellectual property management. By addressing funding challenges, refining IP strategies, and fostering investor expertise, the UK can solidify its position as a global leader in deep tech commercialisation.

At Mathys & Squire LLP, we have a profound comprehension of industry standards, intricacies, and the unique challenges entailed in patenting cutting-edge inventions within the dynamic realm of deep tech. For more information on our specialist advice in this sector, visit our website or explore our dedicated Scaleup Quarter platform, tailored for companies ranging from start-ups to university spinouts.

Mathys & Squire have published a report on the use of the Unitary Patent system in the field of healthcare & life sciences, sharing the results of a survey on the patents granted to a selected number of applicants in 2023 and 2024 across four technical areas. The report was compiled by Partner Nicholas Fox and Associate Maxwell Haughey.

Good news! You have just heard that the EPO has decided to grant your healthcare patent application. You must now decide whether to allow the granted patent to be granted as a Unitary Patent in the member states participating in the Unitary Patent Court (UPC) or as a bundle of national patents and potentially file opt-outs to protect the national patents from central revocation in the UPC. You are aware of the various pros and cons of the UPC (see our opt-out brochure for further information), but what is everyone else doing? The pharmaceutical industry has been expected to adopt a cautious approach towards the UPC due to the value of individual patents and the potentially significant economic impact of a patent being revoked in multiple jurisdictions in a single court action. Does this mean that everyone simply opts their healthcare patents out of the UPC?

Percentage of Unitary Patents by technical field

The UPC entered into force on 1 June 2023, but it was possible to delay the grant of a European Patent from the beginning of the year until Unitary Patents might be granted. In practice this means that 2024 was the first full year when patent proprietors had the choice of obtaining Unitary Patents, even though, at least theoretically, any European Patent application found in order for grant since 1 January 2023 could have been converted into a Unitary Patent if a patent proprietor chose to do so.

It is perhaps unsurprising then that the percentage of European patents granted in 2024 in healthcare fields which ended up being maintained as Unitary Patents increased. This was true across all healthcare fields sampled. Use of the Unitary Patent was particularly high in the case of medical devices where approximately 30% of all patents granted in Europe in 2024 were maintained as Unitary Patents up from around 20% in 2023. As the graph below (FIG.1) illustrates significant proportions of granted European Patents end up as Unitary Patents subject to the jurisdiction of the UPC across all healthcare fields. Any suggestion that healthcare companies are opting all their patents out from the jurisdiction of the UPC is clearly wrong.

Figure 1: Percentage UPs by Technical Field

But what are specific applicants doing? To answer this question, we have sampled a range of applicants in each of the above technical areas. The sample we selected included most of the largest filers in the healthcare sector in addition to several applicants from related sectors such as agrochemicals and fine chemicals.

Organic Chemistry

FIG. 2 below shows the results of our survey for major patentees for patent applications relating to organic chemistry. In the graph below we show the numbers of European Patents (EPs) each applicant has chosen to maintain as national patents and the numbers of patents where the applicant has opted to have the patents maintained as Unitary Patents (UPs). The figure then further breaks these numbers down across patents granted in 2023 and 2024 to see if any change in behaviour of an individual applicant can be identified.

Figure 2: Granted EPs and UPs – Organic Chemistry

As can be seen in the graph above, a number of the significant filers in organic chemistry have engaged very little with the Unitary Patent system having either zero or low single digit numbers of Unitary Patents granted in 2023/24. For example, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, LG Group, Merck Sharp & Dohme (Merck & Co Inc.), Novartis, and Samsung all had no Unitary Patents granted in 2023, and at most had a single Unitary Patent granted in 2024. This group includes Bristol-Myers Squibb, LG Group, and Merck Sharp & Dohme who were among the largest filers for patents in this area of technology.

Where an applicant has been very selective about engagement with the Unitary Patent system, it may be the case that a or particular patents relate to technology for which a Unitary Patent is particularly suitable. Potentially, this may explain the single Merck Patent GmbH (Merck KGaA) Unitary Patent granted in 2024. That patent concerned a chemical process which involved multiple individual process steps which potentially could be conducted in different European countries for which protection via a Unitary Patent was particularly suitable.

Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Novartis all had no Unitary Patents granted in the field of organic chemistry in 2023/24, and each had a single organic chemistry Unitary Patent granted in 2024. Potentially, these might also have been chosen as “test cases” for using the Unitary Patent system or for specific reasons relating to the individual inventions that the patents cover.

Other applicants have used the Unitary Patent system more widely, for example BASF, Gilead, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Syngenta, and Takeda.

Collectively, the figures indicate that different companies are taking very different approaches to the UPC and the Unitary Patent System. There is no uniformity of approach.

By way of example, Roche and Novartis are both multinational Swiss pharmaceutical corporations ranking in the top five global pharmaceutical companies by revenue. In the field of organic chemistry, Novartis converted none of their European Patents into Unitary Patents in 2023 and obtained only a single Unitary Patent in 2024. This compares with 40 and 43 organic chemistry patents in 2023 and 2024 respectively, where Novartis maintained their patents as a bundle of national rights. In contrast, Roche had 36 organic chemistry Unitary Patents granted in 2023 (compared to 44 European Patents maintained as a bundle of national rights), and this increased to 38 Unitary Patents granted in 2024 (compared to 27 European Patents maintained as a bundle of national rights). Hence, in contrast to Novartis who has yet to really engage with the Unitary Patent system, the majority of Roche’s organic chemistry applications are now being maintained as Unitary Patents.

The upward trend in the proportion of patents maintained as Unitary Patents which is apparent from Roche can also be seen in the figures for other applicants. Thus, for example, Syngenta also had a greater proportion of maintained as Unitary Patents in 2024 compared with 2023 so that in 2024 a majority of Syngenta’s patents in the field of organic chemistry were maintained as Unitary Patents rather than a bundle of national rights (16 Unitary Patents compared with 12 patents maintained as national rights).

Tentatively, this may suggest that some applicants are overcoming their initial caution about the use of the Unitary Patent system. However, as we only have two year’s data, and the data from 2023 is necessarily impacted by the introduction of the Unitary Patent half-way through that year (albeit with the option of selectively delaying patent grant where a proprietor really wished to obtain a Unitary Patent), it is probably too early to tell.

Organic Pharmaceuticals

Similar mixed signals are also shown in the numbers of patents converted into Unitary Patents by major filers in the field of organic pharmaceuticals shown below (FIG. 3)

Figure 3: Granted EPs and UPs – Organic Pharmaceuticals

AbbVie, Bayer, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Gilead, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda all show relatively widespread uptake of Unitary Patents in the field of organic pharmaceuticals.

Chiesi Farmaceutici has chosen to convert the majority of their granted patents into Unitary Patents. This was the case both 2023 and 2024 when 4 and then 5 of Chiesi Farmaceutici patents were converted into Unitary Patents compared to 2 and then 5 patents which were maintained as national rights.

Although the sample size is small, AbbVie had no organic pharmaceutical Unitary Patents granted in 2023 (and a single patent maintained as a bundle of national rights), but 3 Unitary Patents granted in 2024 with no rights not being maintained as Unitary Patents.

Some applicants – Amgen, Bayer, Chiesi Farmaceutici, GSK, Johnson & Johnson, Sanofi, and Takeda – increased their use of the Unitary Patent system in 2024, However, others – AstraZeneca, Merck Patent GmbH, Pfizer, and Vertex – obtained Unitary Patents in 2023 but obtained no Unitary Patents in 2024. Whereas other major players in the field – Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Regeneron – have entirely avoided the Unitary Patent system for organic pharmaceutical inventions and have chosen instead to maintain all their European patents as bundles of national rights.

Biologics

FIG. 4 shows a similar analysis, this time in the field of Biologics.

Figure 4: Granted EPs and UPs – Biologics

Apart from Biogen, Johnson & Johnson, Novo Nordisk, Regeneron, and Roche, applicants generally seem to be more reluctant to use the Unitary Patent system for biologics. Of the applicants sampled, only Novo Nordisk obtained Unitary Patents for a majority of their granted patent applications (7 and 6 Unitary Patents in 2023/24, respectively compared to 2 and then 1 patent which was maintained as a bundle of national rights).

The greatest number of biologics Unitary Patents in our sample were granted to Roche. However, that was due to the higher number of patents that Roche obtained compared to the companies in the survey and still represented a minority of Roche’s biologics patents overall (10 and then 15 Unitary Patents in 2023 and 2024 compared with 16 and then 18 patents maintained as national rights in 2023 and 2024 respectively).

Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck Sharp & Dohme converted none of their European Patents into Unitary Patents in 2023/24, despite these applicants being among the largest filers in this field. Whereas Novartis chose to maintain only a single European patent as a Unitary Patent in 2024, opting for national rights for 19 and then 22 biologics patents in 2023 and 2024 respectively.

Medical Devices

Medical device applicants appear to be most divided in their adoption of the UPC (FIG. 5).

Figure 5: Granted EPs and UPs – Medical Devices

A significant number of applicants sampled have chosen to not to obtain Unitary Patents – see Intuitive Surgical, Novartis, ResMed, Smith and Nephew, Solventum (3M Health Care), and Stryker. This is particularly significant because some of the largest filers in the field of medical devices have chosen to take this approach.

Other applicants such as Abbott Laboratories, Braun, Dexcom, Fujifilm, GE Healthcare, and Medtronic, had either a single or low single digit number of Unitary Patents granted in 2023/2024, compared with significantly higher number of patents which were maintained as national rights. Of these applicants, all but Abbott Laboratories and Dexcom deferred their adoption of the Unitary Patent system for medical devices until 2024.

On the other hand, Becton, Dickinson and Company is notable for obtaining 38 medical device Unitary Patents in 2023 (compared to 14 patents maintained as national rights). Then in 2024, Becton Dickinson’s number of Unitary Patents was an order of magnitude greater than the number maintained as a bundle of national rights – 74 Unitary Patents compared to 7 maintained as national rights.

All of the medical device patents granted in Europe to Align were maintained as Unitary Patents in both 2023 and 2024. In fact, out of 49 patents granted to Align in Europe in 2023 (in all areas of technology), only a single patent (relating to a computer program) was not maintained as a Unitary Patent.

Other large filers including Edwards Lifesciences and Philips are choosing to obtain a mix of Unitary Patents and bundles of national rights. Although, both companies are opting for the Unitary Patent route for only a minority of their patents, in both cases the numbers of Unitary Patents granted doubled in 2023 compared with 2024. Potentially, this suggests that these companies chose not to delay grant of patents prior to 1 June 2023 just for the opportunity to obtain Unitary Patents which would cause the 2023 numbers to represent grants for only around half a year and that Edwards Lifesciences and Philips have been converting a consistent proportion of their Medical Devices patents into Unitary Patents since then.

Roche, Sanofi, and Siemens had a large proportion of their medical device patents granted as Unitary Patents in both 2023 and 2024 with between 45% and 65% of medical device patents for these three companies being maintained as Unitary Patents in 2024.

Sanofi and Roche provide an interesting example of how take up of the Unitary Patent is impacted by technical field. Looking at the figures for 2024, Sanofi converted a greater proportion of their medical device patents to Unitary Patents (46%) than was the case for organic chemistry patents (37%) or biologics (5%). Similarly, Roche’s figures vary significantly across different fields and in many cases are quite different from those for Sanofi with Roche obtaining Unitary Patents for 64% of their medical device patents, 37% of their organic chemistry patents, 58% of their organic pharmaceutical patents and 45% of their biologics patents.

Conclusions

As shown above, it is clear that at present different companies are adopting very different approaches to the use of the Unitary Patent system and that the approaches are nuanced depending upon the area of technology a patent involves. Widespread adoption of the Unitary Patent has not been limited to European-domiciled companies, with several US applicants now maintaining a significant proportion of patents in Europe as Unitary Patents.

It is clearly not the case that large companies choose to maintain all their patents as national rights, opting the patents out from the jurisdiction of the UPC to protect such rights from central revocation.  

How those approaches develop further, only time will tell.

Organised by the General Assembly, the 26^th of January is now recognised as the International Day of Clean Energy, enabling the opportunity to reflect and refocus on the collective goals of sustainability. In this article, Associate Jessie Harrison examines the current state of cleantech as we begin the new year.

As we enter 2025, climate change remains a hotly debated topic in global politics.  

Last year signalled yet another record breaking rise in global temperatures, however only last week President Trump announced his intention to withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement.

In Europe, the European Green Deal has placed pressure on the EU’s commitment to protect the climate. This includes goals of becoming climate neutral by 2050, and reducing emissions by 55% in 2030.

However, based on current trends, the United Nations has declared that the world is not on track to successfully achieve Sustainable Development Goal 7 – ‘Affordable and Clean Energy’ – by 2030.

It is increasingly clear that innovation and new cleantech technologies are essential to achieving these goals.

Cleantech relates to a diverse range of technologies that contribute to reducing our environmental impact. In the energy sector, this includes the likes of innovative renewables, long-duration energy storage, grid flexibility, and green hydrogen.

The Royal Academy of Engineering’s recent ‘State of UK Deeptech 2024’ report identified that, among the seven deep tech areas (manufacturing & materials; robotics, hardware & chips; networks; healthcare; frontier applications; energy; and AI & computing), energy exhibited the strongest growth in deal count between 2018 and 2023 with a compound annual growth rate of 12.9%. Investment in alternative energy sources is increasingly being seen to be both sustainable environmentally and financially, with growing public sector support. Indeed, S&P Global predicts that clean energy technology supply spending will surpass investments in upstream oil and gas for the first time in 2025.

In such an innovation-driven industry, intellectual property plays an important role in the successful development, protection, and commercialisation of new cleantech technologies.

This was clearly demonstrated in a 2024 report by the European Patent Office, EPO, which reported over 750,000 published international patent families in clean and sustainable technologies worldwide across a 25 year period up to 2021. In 2021 alone, almost 15% of all technological inventions disclosed globally related to clean and sustainable inventions.

As we look ahead for 2025, we can expect to see the demand for clean and scalable energy solutions surge, driven by the need to sustainably power the growing number of energy-intensive data centres supporting the AI revolution.