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

Cookies Settings

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

The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
Gift this article