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
HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER strengthens litigation practice with renowned patent attorney
On January 1, 2026, experienced patent attorney and European Patent Attorney C. Thomas Becher will join HOYNG ROKH MONEGIER's litigation practice.
Towards a uniform test of equivalence before the UPC
The early years of the UPC have brought us a first wave of decisions dealing with the doctrine of equivalence (hereinafter “DoE”). The purpose of this well-known doctrine is undisputed: to strike a balance between providing fair protection for patentees and ensuring legal certainty for third parties, as set out in the Protocol to Article 69 EPC. As patent litigators, we know that the challenge lies in translating this purpose into practical tools that can tip the balance one way or the other. For decades, this balancing act has resulted in various national doctrines across Europe. Consolidating these approaches and/or choosing among them is a genuine challenge for this new European court.
UPC Unfiltered, by Willem Hoyng – UPC decisions week 46, 2025
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.