LSPN Europe: understand our business models, say in-house lawyers
The best lawyers acting for life sciences companies make sure they fully understand their clients’ business models, said in-house counsel at Life Sciences Patent Network 2019.
Addressing delegates during a seminar on the day-to-day challenges in prosecuting and enforcing patents, a panel of in-house lawyers at big pharma and small and medium sized enterprises offered their tips for managing clients.
Andy Porter, patent attorney at Elasmogen, said he was delighted to hear lawyers say they know the business model of the companies they’re working with.
“It’s quite possible for me to have a conversation with patent guys one week and tell them we’re in ‘inflammation’, then a week later I can call them back and say forget that, we’re an oncology company. In the biotech space it can change that quickly. It’s really important that they’re on top of the business model that we’re trying to make work,” Porter said.
Porter added that Elasmogen regularly meets with its patent attorneys to decide what the patent strategy will be for the next three months.
At the other end of the scale, Laura Reynolds, associate general counsel, European IP and regulatory litigation, at Teva, stressed the importance of lawyers finding out exactly what advice was needed.
Reynolds, who left Bristows in August to go in-house, shared her own experience of being on both sides of the relationship.
“In private practice I was always striving to deliver what information the client needed, because it varies very much on how sophisticated and [what] level of detail they want. It’s always important to start out with concise advice and give some recommendations and different strategies,” Reynolds said.
It is also “crucial” that external law firms have an awareness of litigation developments in other countries, she added.
‘Christmas presents’
Chair of the panel, DLA Piper partner Richard Taylor, asked the group to offer in-house lawyer “Christmas presents” to the room.
Steven Ward, patent lawyer at Syngenta, said being aggressive in litigation, at least initially, was a good idea.
“Go in hard and fast, try and disrupt their business as soon as you can to get their CEOs attention … then be prepared to negotiate fairly swiftly soon after,” Ward said.
He added: “That’s the way to spend the least money. If you’ve got prolonged litigation you’re likely to end up with very large bills and you’re still no more likely to win.”
Meanwhile, Ian Bryan, senior IP counsel at GE Healthcare, said in-house teams like it when all the risks and costs associated with a strategy are discussed “early on” because business “hates a surprise or a shock”.
LSPN Europe was hosted by Life Sciences IP Review in London on November 21.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.
