Who we are
Intellectual property is our passion.
We are driven by ideas and innovation.
We work tirelessly to protect them and help our clients changing the world around us.
HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER understands the need for an intellectual property lawyer who knows the industry at hand, is straight-talking and straight-shooting, and able to deliver. No matter what.
Our dedicated European team has more than one hundred intellectual property professionals. In the full belief there cannot be a compromise as to legal quality, we chose to dedicate our practice entirely to intellectual property and related regulatory issues. But we also have the technical background and expertise to deal with the most challenging technologies often involved in IP disputes. Our experience and pioneering mentality unite in groundbreaking cases we handle across borders.
HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER is the go-to intellectual property law firm in Europe.
Latest News
UPC Unfiltered, by Willem Hoyng – UPC decisions week 12, 2026
Below, Prof. Willem Hoyng provides his unfiltered views on the decisions that were published on the website of the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) last week. His comments offer a unique insight into the UPC’s case law, as he chairs the Advisory Board of the UPC and participated in drafting the Rules of Procedure of the UPC.
Interested in more of this? Stay tuned and subscribe here for weekly updates.
On the go, multi-tasking or just prefer to listen? “Willem Hoyng’s UPC Unfiltered AI Podcast” – your weekly, AI-generated podcast discussing Willem Hoyng’s commentary on UPC case law of last week, offers a convenient alternative. Listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.
Chambers & Partners Europe Guide 2026
HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER has once again been recognised in the Chambers & Partners Europe Guide 2026, with rankings spanning multiple jurisdictions and practice areas.
UPC case law on claim interpretation
As of the launch of the UPC in June 2023, the case law ruling on the interpretation of claims was eagerly awaited. Starting with a brief overview of the key points set out in the EPO’s Enlarged Board of appeal decision G1/24 we present four relevant UPC decisions discussing how the case law of Court of Appeal (CoA) on claim interpretation has evolved in view of G1/24.
In the hallmark decision 10x Genomics v. NanoString (UPC CoA 335/202) the Court of Appeal has determined the key principles for claim interpretation regarding patentability and infringement of claims.
By way of further UPC CoA decisions, namely Insulet v. EOFlow (UPC CoA 768/2024), Meril v. Edwards (UPC CoA 21/2025), and Alexion v. Amgen (UPC CoA 405/2024) we highlight how the CoA adopted the principles set out in 10x Genomics v. NanoString. The decisions discussed herein reflect the efforts of the EPO and UPC towards harmonized case law on claim interpretation.