Mark Didmon

• Experienced advocate with over 100 cases before the European Patent Office (EPO) Opposition Divisions and Boards of Appeal
• Qualified patent attorney litigator with High Court and Court of Appeal successes in Stretchline Intellectual Properties Limited v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz Limited
• Unified Patent Court (UPC) representative, acted before the Munich Central Division in two of the first UPC revocation actions in Astellas v. Healios, filed on the first day of the court in 2023 and coordinated with parallel EPO oppositions
• Represents BioInvent International, handling the global patent portfolio for its therapeutic antibodies, many now in clinical trials
• Represents Novozymes, handling EPO opposition and appeal cases in its bioenergy, food and beverage, and household care sectors, several coordinated with parallel litigation in European national courts
• Represents Novo Nordisk, handling numerous EPO opposition and appeal cases for GLP-1 receptor agonist products Ozempic® and Wegovy®
• Numerous EPO opposition and appeal cases in the CRISPR gene-editing field, including key patents held by the Broad Institute
• Worked with Karolinska Institutet Innovations for over a decade, advising first-time inventors and spin-outs and acting for many of the resulting companies in Stockholm’s biotech cluster

EPO opposition highlights‍

• EP1706477 Novozymes vs DSM IP Assets (T 2952/19) – successful defence of a patent (maintained as granted) relating to the use of xylanases in beverage production.
• EP3228194 Novozymes vs DSM IP Assets – successful opposition (complete revocation) of a patent relating to the use of lactases in fermented milk products.
• EP2561064 Novozymes vs DSM IP Assets (T 0972/20) – successful opposition (complete revocation) of a patent relating to genetically-engineered bacterial cells for biofuel applications.
• EP2825643 Novozymes vs Danisco US – successful opposition of a patent relating to variant alpha amylase enzymes. The case was notable because it involved coordination with parallel litigation in the Italian and Danish courts.
• EP2859097 Novozymes vs Danisco US – successful opposition of a patent relating to variant alpha amylase enzymes. The case was notable because it involved coordination with parallel litigation in the Italian and Danish courts.
• EP3423082 Novo Nordisk vs multiple parties – defence of a patent relating to the GLP1 agonist liraglutide. The case was notable because it involved five Opponents.
• EP3300721 Novo Nordisk vs multiple parties – defence of a patent relating to GLP1 agonists. The case was notable because it involved five Opponents. The patent was maintained with commercially relevant claim scope covering the blockbuster Victoza® and Saxenda® products.
• EP2771468 Strawman Limited vs Broad Institute (T 0844/18) – successful opposition (complete revocation) of an early, seminal patent relating to CRISPR gene-editing technology. The Board of Appeal opted not to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal in respect of priority entitlement (an issue was subsequently referred in cases G1/21 and G1/22).
• EP3310917, EP3502253 and EP3470519 Strawman Limited vs Broad Institute and others – successful oppositions to three patents relating to CRISPR gene-editing technology and the Cpf1 endonuclease.
• EP3283625 Strawman Limited vs Wageningen Universitet (T 0386/23) – successful opposition (complete revocation) of a patent relating to CRISPR gene-editing technology and the Cpf1 endonuclease.
• EP1735454 Novozymes vs Clariant International (T 2911/19 and R 0001/23) – successful defence of a patent (maintained as granted) relating to methods for converting plant cell wall polysaccharides in biofuel production. The case was notable because the Opponent filed a Petition for Review, which was ultimately rejected by the Enlarged Board of Appeal.
• EP305654 Strawman Limited vs Healios, Riken and Osaka University – opposition of a patent relating to retinal pigment epithelial cells CRISPR gene-editing technology and the newly identified Cpf1 Cas endonuclease. The case was notable because it involved related revocation proceedings at the Unified Patent Court (UPC_CFI_75/2023).

• UK and European Patent Attorney
• Unified Patent Court representative
• Patent Attorney Litigator (Higher Courts Litigation Certificate), University of Nottingham
• PhD, Molecular Cell Biology, University of Warwick
• BSc, Microbiology and Virology, University of Warwick

• IAM Patent 1000: Prosecution
• MIP IP STARS: Patent Star
• MIP IP STARS: IP Star
• Legal 500
• Moss Prize (2005): Highest combined mark in UK Patent Law and International Patent Law foundation exams