The EPO’s decision in G2/21 was meant to bring clarity, but questions around plausibility standards remain unsettled. This panel will assess how national courts and the EPO are applying the doctrine and the implications for life sciences patents.
• Compare approaches to plausibility in the UK, Netherlands, and EPO post-G2/21.
• How are national courts diverging from or aligning with the EPO's reasoning?
• Explore how plausibility has been tested in key cases including Apixaban and Dapagliflozi.
• Understand the vulnerability of life sciences patents under current plausibility thresholds and discuss the risks of invalidation, and how should companies adapt?
• Discuss the comparative written description and enablement standards in the USA and the latest case law which may affect your global litigation strategy.
Corinna Sundermann
Guido Pontremoli
Currently employed as global Head of the IP department-Patent at Chiesi Farmaceutici SpA, managing and coaching a team of experienced patent attorneys, patent searchers and administrators, working on the protection, enforcement, litigation and/or opposition of the Chiesi IP, aligned with business decisions.
Before joining Chiesi, I worked in IP groups of big pharma companies (GSK Vaccine, and Bracco Imaging) as senior patent attorney responsible for all the IP aspects concerning some key R&D projects. I also had experience as patent counsel in private practices, dealing with pharma, chemical and bio entities.
Graduated in chemistry from the Univ of Milan, with a PhD in medicinal chemistry and a post-doc experience in USA, I am qualified EPA and chartered Italian patent attorney.
