Spring direct naar de hoofdnavigatie of de inhoud
‘It is very rewarding to capture an invention in the proper words.’
Otto Oudshoorn

Otto Oudshoorn

  • Chemistry
  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney, European Patent Litigator
  • Partner

Otto Oudshoorn joined V.O. in 1998. He studied chemical engineering and obtained his PhD in the field of catalysis. Otto’s expertise is in the field of chemical patents, with an emphasis on process and food technology.

Continue reading

His practice further includes the handling of supplementary protection certificates (SPCs) and restoration requests.

He has extensive experience in oral (opposition) proceedings and litigation before the Dutch patent court. Otto’s portfolio contains the full spectrum of innovative clients, ranging from startup businesses to multinationals, from universities to research institutions

Otto is member of the China Desk, member of the board of directors of V.O. and head of the Section Chemistry & Life Sciences.

In his capacity as European Patent Litigator, Otto is allowed to act as UPC representative.

Working experience

  • Patent Attorney, V.O. (1998-present)

Education

  • PhD in Chemistry, Delft University of Technology (1998)
  • MSc in Chemical technology and materials science, Delft University of Technology (1993)

Directories

  • “Otto Oudshoorn champions innovation and excellence as the head of chemistry and life sciences; employing his advanced academic expertise in chemical engineering he thrives as a leading figure in chemical patents” (IAM Patent 1000, 2025)
  • “Also a crucial member of the China desk, Otto Oudshoorn melds his PhD background in chemical engineering and his technical expertise in chemical patents to make innovative moves, specifically on process and food technology. He is a valued part of the group and heads the chemistry and life sciences section” (IAM Patent 1000, 2024)
  • Recommended individual (JUVE Patent 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024)
  • “He is one of the best for SPC litigation in the Netherlands” (JUVE Patent 2022)
  • “Drawing judiciously upon his catalysis doctorate, chemist Oudshoorn has a wealth of insight in prosecuting patents and handles supplementary protection certificates with ease” (IAM Patent 1000, 2023)
  • “Otto Oudshoorn plays an important leadership role at V.O., as he does for his clients: companies look to him for advice to guide their decision making at a fundamental business level. For anything chemical-related, including oppositions and litigation, he’s a sure bet” (IAM Patent 1000, 2021).
  • Recognized as IP Star (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025) by Managing Intellectual Property
  • Recommended Individual (IAM Patent 1000, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025)
  • “Specialist for SPC litigation” (JUVE Patent 2020)
  • “Otto Oudshoorn, Hajo Kraak and Frits Schut are mainstays of the life sciences and chemistry practice. Heading this up, Oudshoorn is an authority on food technology” (IAM Patent 1000, 2019)
  • “Leading the chemistry and life sciences division, Otto Oudshoorn spends much of his time immersed in the world of pharmaceutical litigation. He adroitly juggles thorny questions relating to supplementary protection certificates for an assortment of industry leaders” (IAM Patent 1000, 2018)
  • “Otto Oudshoorn, working alongside Bernard Ledeboer on the China Desk, is a chemical engineering champ for whom SPCs are a specialist subject” (IAM Patent 1000, 2017)
  • “Otto Oudshoorn is a high-flying chemist. He is pragmatic and keen, and his advice is always clear and easy to read” (IAM Patent 1000, 2016)
  • “Chemical maven Otto Oudshoorn also has extensive experience in oppositions and litigations; at any given time, he has a sizeable docket of supplementary protection certificate cases on the go. He is also the man behind the success of a dedicated China desk” (IAM Patent 1000, 2015)

Publications

  • G.B.F. Seijger, O.L. Oudshoorn, A. Boekhorst, H. van Bekkum, C.M. van den Bleek, H.P.A. Calis, Chem. Eng. Sci., 56 (2001) 849.
  • Z. Shan, W.E.J. van Kooten, O.L. Oudshoorn, J.C. Jansen, H. van Bekkum, C.M. van den Bleek, H.P.A. Calis, Microporous Mesoporous Mater., 34 (2000) 81
  • G.B.F. Seijger, O.L. Oudshoorn, W.E.J. van Kooten, J.C. Jansen, H. van Bekkum, C.M. van den Bleek, H.P.A. Calis, Microporous Mesoporous Mater., 39 (2000) 195.
  • O. L. Oudshoorn, M. Janissen, W. E. J. van Kooten, J. C. Jansen, H. van Bekkum, C. M. van den Bleek, H. P. A. Calis, Chem. Eng. J. 54 (1999) 1413.
  • O.L. Oudshoorn, Zeolitic Coatings applied in Structured Catalyst Packings, Ph.D. Thesis, Delft University of Technology, 1998.
  • Calis, Hans Peter; Oudshoorn, Otto L.; Gerritsen, Albert W.; Jansen, Koos J. C.; van den Bleek, Cor M.; van Bekkum, Herman; Anwendung von Zeolithen bei der selektiven katalytischen Reduktion von NOx in Industrieabgasen; Chemie Ingenieur Technik – CIT 67 (1995), S. 777-780

Languages

  • English
  • Dutch
  • German

Also see these experts

Martin Klok

Martin Klok

  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney, European Patent Litigator
  • Valuation specialist
  • Partner
Huub Maas

Huub Maas

  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney, European Patent Litigator
  • Partner
More experts

News

Interpreting claim terms “holistically” after G 1/24: description-based definition applied in T 0439/22 (Board 3.2.01)

In T 0439/22 (Technical Board of Appeal 3.2.01, 11 December 2025) the Board applied the Enlarged Board’s guidance in G 1/24 on claim interpretation. The decision is a practical illustration of how an explicit definition in the description can determine the meaning of a seemingly straightforward term used in the claims. As this case shows, […]Continue reading

Omission of drawings from the granted patent: limits of “deemed approval” and appeal as a remedy (T 0550/25) 

In T 0550/25 (Technical Board of Appeal, 10 February 2026), the Board addressed a recurring procedural mishap: drawing sheets are missing from the text annexed to a Rule 71(3) EPC communication and the patent is granted without them. The decision is practically significant because it confirms that, in such circumstances, the applicant’s grant fee payment […]Continue reading

UPC Court of Appeal on territorial scope, late claim amendments and proportionality of injunctions in a life-sciences dispute 

In its decision of 25 November 2025 in Edwards Lifesciences vs. Meril (APL_2205/2025), the UPC Court of Appeal addressed procedural discipline in framing remedies (especially territorial scope) and refined how proportionality may shape injunctive relief in a medical-device case. The decision forms part of a combined judgment in the wider Meril v Edwards / Edwards v Meril appeals package.  Continue reading