As scrutiny of inventive step and sufficiency intensifies in Europe under evolving EPO and UPC practice, originators face growing pressure to substantiate broad antibody claims with a credible technical contribution and sufficient data at the point of filing. This pressure is further reinforced post-Amgen v. Sanofi (2023) in the U.S., where the enablement doctrine has tightened the boundaries for broad antibody claims.
This session will examine the core IP challenges in the antibody and biologics space, placing recent high profile European and U.S. case law in the context of practical strategies you can deploy to secure broad and robust protection for biological molecules.
- Are broad functional antibody claims in the U.S. still defensible post-Amgen v. Sanofi (2023)?
- What impact has the landmark UPC Court of Appeal decision in Amgen v. Sanofi & Regeneron (Nov 2025) had on antibody claims in Europe?
- How is inventive step for antibodies being assessed currently by major patent offices, including USPTO, EPO, JPO and CNIPA?
- Is the presumption of obviousness of antibody inventions at the EPO justified? - How does the notion of “routine methods” impact antibody patentability?
- How much data do you need in a patent application to demonstrate inventiveness?
- Is there a middle ground between broad, functionally defined claims and narrowly defined sequence claims?
- How can you curate an antibody development and IP strategy that is adaptable to a changing prior art and reference antibody landscape?
Anish Desai
Anish Desai is a first-chair trial lawyer who leads complex competitor life science and technology cases in federal district courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent and Trial Appeal Board, and in arbitration proceedings. IAM Patent 1000 described Mr. Desai as a “smart attorney who is excellent at simplifying technical detail for judges and juries and great on his feet,” while Chambers USA notes that he “provides thoughtful, strategic advice” and “is excellent in court and a rising star; he is the next generation” in the patent litigation area.
Christoph Rehfuess
Richard Page
Richard Page is a European Patent Attorney and a UPC Representative, specialising in life science patents. Drawing on his solid technical background as a researcher in the UK and Germany and fourteen years of IP experience, he advises clients across a broad range of life science technologies. He has particular expertise in antibody-related inventions, vaccines and second medical uses. Richard has a strong track record in opposition and appeal proceedings before the European Patent Office, and he brings his contentious insights into his drafting and prosecution work to help clients secure strategically robust and commercially valuable patent protection.
Stefanie Kies
Tamaris Bucher
Tamaris is a Principal Patent Attorney at Novartis. She has gained extensive experience in pharmaceuticals in her almost ten years at Novartis, as well as from a previous role at a patent law firm in Basel.
She specialises in patent matters relating to antibody technology and cell & gene therapies. She has expertise in patent prosecution and SPC issues, as well as a keen interest in following legal developments in these areas.
Tamaris is both a registered European Patent Attorney and Swiss Patent Attorney. Additionally, she has a background in Australian patent law, having completed a Master of Industrial Property at the University of Technology, Sydney.