No second PI for 10x against NanoString, UPC rules

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

No second PI for 10x against NanoString, UPC rules

Munich.jpg
Munich

Judge Matthias Zigann said the panel wasn’t convinced that NanoString had infringed the 10x Genomics patent

The Unified Patent Court refused to grant a second preliminary injunction for 10x Genomics against rival biotech company NanoString in Munich today, October 10.

Presiding judge Matthias Zigann said the panel was unconvinced that NanoString had infringed 10x’s patent.

The judge said the panel’s findings on infringement and validity were not prejudicial on the main proceedings.

10x won the first full PI hearing in the court’s history last month over a separate but related patent. That ruling meant NanoString cannot sell its allegedly infringing products in 17 European countries while proceedings are ongoing.

The lawsuit concerns NanoString’s CosMx Spatial Molecular Imager device and CosMx reagents for RNA detection.

10x claimed NanoString infringed patents related to Xenium, the company’s own RNA analysis tool that it launched in December 2022.

There is parallel litigation between the parties at the US District Court for the District of Delaware, where 10x has also filed two infringement lawsuits.

Trials have been scheduled in Delaware in November 2023 and September 2024.

NanoString has argued that 10x’s technology was originally developed at Harvard University with grant funding from the US National Institutes of Health, with the intention it would be made widely available via licensing.

Harvard exclusively licensed the technology to ReadCoor, which was acquired by 10x in 2020.

“In contrast with the promises made in the grant application, 10x is now using the acquired ReadCoor patents in lawsuits designed to reduce the scientific community’s access to innovative technologies intended for broad access,” NanoString has claimed.

Germany’s Federal Patent Court has also issued a preliminary opinion in which it found the claims of one of 10x’s key patents to be valid. An oral hearing has been scheduled for May 2024.

The Munich Regional Court, meanwhile, granted an injunction in favour of 10x in May this year. NanoString has appealed against that ruling to the Higher Regional Court.

10x may yet appeal the latest UPC ruling. The UPC has yet to schedule a date for a trial on the merits of the case.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

VO, which has offices in the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany, is the second European IP firm to secure external backing this week
The Bardehle Pagenberg attorneys-at-law discuss the firm’s Managing IP EMEA Awards 2026 success, Unified Patent Court litigation strategy, and evolving European patent trends
A patent battle between two legal tech companies and a loss for Elon Musk’s xAI against OpenAI were also among the top talking points
With drug prices a hot topic in the US, courts are seemingly more reluctant to prevent the entry of generics to the market
Academic Eden Sarid joins us during Pride Month to discuss queer expression and IP law, Patagonia v Pattie Gonia, and how queer and AI-generated creations both pose novelty concerns
Patent attorney Michael Henson joins the firm to lead its freshly launched blockchain and digital assets practice
A dispute over mammogram technology, and a development in the case between GSK and Moderna were also among the top talking points in recent weeks
With rankings for Western Europe set to be published on June 25, we sat down with our research lead to find out what practitioners and law firms can expect
Peter O’Sullivan, a professional services executive, says he is looking forward to helping Pearce IP become the leading life sciences firm in Australia and New Zealand
Matteo Di Lernia, advocate at LCA Studio Legale, unpicks the CJEU’s ruling in M.M. Ristorazione v Villa Ramazzini, including its impact on litigation strategies
Gift this article