Eijsvogels is exceptional on the procedural aspects of IP law and is willing to try new things that nobody else thinks of, in order to advance his case.
IAM Patent 1000
Frank has a broad practice which comprises matters in the field of patent law, design law, trademark law and the law of unfair competition. Het is specialized in customs matters in the field of the anti-piracy regulation. Furthermore, Frank has extensive experience in the following area’s: drafting agreements with respect tot trade secrets, intellectual property and/or information technology, acting in contractual disputes before the government courts or in arbitration, advising about clinical trial agreements, compliance and advertising issues relating to medicines and medical devices and advising on (and drafting agreements relating to) the protection of personal data.
Frank is entitled to represent clients in proceedings before the Supreme Court.
Frank is an active member of the editorial board of Intellectuele Eigendom & Reclamerecht (Intellectual Property & Advertising Law) and regularly publishes about intellectual property law. He is member of the Examination Committee Patent Attorneys and regularly gives lectures in the field of intellectual property law.
- Astrazeneca v. Sandoz. Represented AstraZeneca in the appeal filed to the Supreme Court by Sandoz against the judgment of the Court of Appeal of The Hague rendered in preliminary injunction proceedings. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
- MC&F v. ITV. Represented MC&F in the appeal filed to the Supreme Court by ITV against the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Amsterdam. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
- Astellas. Represented Astellas in proceedings before the Supreme Court and the Court of Justice of the EU in which questions were raised about, amongst others, the conditions for awarding a claim to provide access to evidence and for deciding on a nullity defense against such claim.
- Solvay. Represented Solvay in case C-616/10 before the Court of Justice of the EU and argued that an invalidity defense that foreign patents are invalid does not affect the jurisdiction of the court to grant a cross-border injunction for patent infringement in summary proceedings. The court of justice of the EU agreed.
- Monsanto. Represented Monsanto in case C-428/08, before the Court of Justice of the EU, this being the first case brought before the European Court of Justice regarding the scope of protection afforded by biotech patents.
- Sanquin v. Diamed. Represented Sanquin with success in proceedings against Diamed. Both the District Court and the Court of Appeal decided that Sanquin had not infringed two patents of Diamed.
- Loewe v. Bang & Olufsen. Represented Loewe in summary proceedings before the Court of Appeal in The Hague in a case against Bang & Olufsen, in which B&O unsuccessfully claimed a European injunction for Loewe to market its Reference ID flat screen television, based on design rights and copyrights.
- International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI)
- European Patent Lawyers Association (EPLAW)
- Benelux Association of Trademark and Design Law (BMM)
- “Handhaving van intellectuele-eigendom”, deLex, 2017, chapters 13 (alternative claims) and 18 (alternative dispute resolution)(Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights).
- Chief editor of “Global Patent Litigation” (Kluwer Law International).
- “The new Customs Regulation, the Commission’s proposals relating to trademarks and transit Back to previous Dutch practice?”, BMM Bulletin 2013/3.
- “Bescherming van bewijs in grensoverschrijdende inbreukgeschillen”, IER 2012/68. (Protection of evidence in cross-border infringement disputes).
- Several case comments in the field of intellectual property law, published in IER.
WHAT OTHERS SAY
- “The exact and detailed Frank Eijsvogels is very successful at winning, particularly when litigation looms in heavily regulated industries: He is great to collaborate with, listens to suggestions and has great legal and business knowledge.” IAM Patent 1000 2021
- “Eijsvogels delves into the nitty-gritty of each brief to obtain stellar results.” World Trademark Review 2021
- “Dexterous and dynamic, Frank Eijsvogels utilises his vast IP experience to get to the crux of complex issues. Frank is a steadfast partner when it comes to driving desirable litigation outcomes; he pursues business-focused strategies.” IAM Patent 1000 2020
- “A top quality and brilliant litigator” Legal 500 2020
- “Frank Eijsvogels stands out for his patent litigation skills and strategic thinking. He gives the clients the confidence that his solutions are the most appropriate.” Legal 500 2020
- “Anti-piracy guru.” World Trademark Review 2020
- “IP enforcement and transactional ace.” IAM Patent 1000 2019
- “Frank Eijsvogels’ knowledge of patent, design, trademark, trade secret and unfair competition law is second to none.” IAM Patent 1000 2019
- “Enforcement doyen.” World Trademark Review 2019
- “Eijsvogels is exceptional on the procedural aspects of IP law and is willing to try new things that nobody else thinks of, in order to advance his case.” IAM Patent 1000 2015
- “Eijsvogels is admired for his ability to think creatively when deploying the statutory tools at his disposal.” World Trademark Review 2015
- “Straight shooter” Frank Eijsvogels “is emerging from the shadow of Willem Hoyng thanks to his command of the courtroom.” IAM Patent 1000 2014
- “Dexterous operator Frank Eijsvogels is at home in virtually every area of intellectual property and is hugely admired as a litigator and counsellor.” IAM Patent 1000 2013
- “Frank Eijsvogels offers abundant knowledge of IT disputes and drafting of IT related licensing agreements.” IAM Patent 1000 2012
- “Prepares well” and “is a master of Dutch procedural matters” Legal 500 2010
Grotius Academie (Information Technology Law, 1998)
University of Hull Law School (LLM, 1992)
University of Utrecht (Law, 1992)