Spring direct naar de hoofdnavigatie of de inhoud
‘IP is the driving force behind R&D.’
Saskia van Doorn

Saskia van Doorn

  • Life Sciences
  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney, European Patent Litigator
  • Senior Associate

Saskia van Doorn started her career as a patent attorney in 2000 after having worked as an editor at Technisch Weekblad for four years. She studied biochemistry at the Radboud University Nijmegen (1991-1996).

Continue reading

Her particular expertise lies in the fields of biochemistry, medical (bio)technology, life sciences, medicine, molecular chemistry and pharmacology. She has a wide experience in patent prosecution, oppositions, patentability searches and third-party rights analyses, mainly for universities and other research institutes, startup companies, and midsized companies.

In her capacity as European Patent Litigator, Saskia is allowed to act as UPC representative.

Working experience

  • Patent Attorney, V.O. (2000-present)
  • Editor of Technisch Weekblad, VNU (1996-2000)

Education

  • MSc in Chemistry, Radboud University Nijmegen (1996)

Languages

  • English
  • Dutch

Also see these experts

Frits Michiels

Frits Michiels

  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney
  • Valuation specialist
  • Partner
Sjoerd Postma

Sjoerd Postma

  • European and Dutch Patent Attorney, European Patent Litigator
  • Senior Associate
More experts

News

UPC anti-anti-suit injunctions as interim measures: Munich Local Division in Huawei v Netgear (UPC_CFI_791/2024)

In its Order of 11 December 2024 in UPC_CFI_791/2024 (Munich Local Division), the Unified Patent Court (UPC) granted an ex parte anti-anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction (AASI/AAEI) to prevent steps in US proceedings that were said to obstruct UPC patent enforcement. The decision is noteworthy for its articulation of the UPC’s jurisdictional basis and the procedural framework for […]Continue reading

R 0016/23: the Enlarged Board confirms the mandatory nature of oral proceedings upon request under Article 116(1) EPC 

In R 0016/23 (Enlarged Board of Appeal, 21 November 2025), the Enlarged Board set aside a Legal Board of Appeal decision which had dismissed an appeal without holding requested oral proceedings. The decision is a clear statement that efficiency and “timely legal certainty” cannot, in themselves, justify restricting the scope of Article 116(1) EPC when […]Continue reading

Medical-device infringement and “standard use”: LD Munich on lege artis use and conditional revocation counterclaims (UPC_CFI_628/2024) 

In its decision on the merits in UPC_CFI_628/2024 (with the related revocation counterclaim UPC_CFI_125/2025), the Munich Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) addressed two practically relevant issues:Continue reading