Why competitor patent monitoring is critical to your drug development strategy

​
April 15, 2026

Whatever stage you are at in the drug discovery and development process, obtaining IP protection is the best way to protect your investment, both monetary and time.  However, another hugely important aspect to a well-founded IP strategy is monitoring competitor IP.  This allows you to track new patent filings in your area of interest, both from known competitors and also new entrants to the field which could pose a threat to your freedom to operate.

There are several benefits to obtaining information on patent filings within your specialist area. For example, the filings can be analysed in terms of chosen jurisdictions, giving you an idea of what geographical areas are important in your specific market. It is important to choose jurisdictions wisely; there is a balance between wanting to maximise the patent protection coverage whilst being mindful of the associated costs. The decision is time sensitive and so looking at trends from competitors can help you make an informed decision.

Furthermore, patent filing information can be analysed to determine gaps in innovation within a technological domain.  Identifying potential gaps within the patent landscape can offer an exclusive advantage over competitors.

As well as keeping a record of existing live patents, it can also be useful to track the status of patents. Competitor monitoring can provide early insight into which patents are about to lapse, such as instances where an annual renewal fee has not been paid or where a patent is reaching the end of its 20 year term. This may provide unexpected opportunities and increased flexibility in the development of a new compound/formulation.

Most potential investors or acquirers will complete due diligence and identify third party rights that are relevant to your space.  Being aware of relevant third party rights yourself, and having answers prepared for the challenging questions that might follow, should allow you to defend your IP position and, with luck, attract a higher valuation.

Competitor monitoring should be an ongoing project as the competitor IP landscape will constantly evolve.  We can generate a competitor monitoring strategy that suits your current needs, and can implement the monitoring strategy using a custom patent landscaping tool, which will identify newly-published relevant documents and flag these for review.

There are various aspects to competitor IP which should be considered and we can advise on strategies to best deal with these.
‍

FTO Analysis

Freedom to Operate (FTO) is a type of analysis which is used to determine whether you are free to commercially exploit your compound/formulation without infringing another party’s IP right. Carrying out an FTO analysis is often a necessity when it comes to securing funding and future investment.

Knowing when to carry out an FTO analysis can be challenging. Complete it too early in the drug development stage and it may be too broad to provide any useful insight. Conversely, too late and significant resources may have been devoted toa product that cannot launch.

Many companies will do more than one FTO review during drug development, with the scale of the review increasing with time. This can build into a detailed and accurate view of the FTOl and scape, which allows investors and partners see the path to commercialisation and ROI.

Third party observations

Third Party Observations (TPOs)are a useful tool which enable you to file objections on the patentability of a pending patent application which may pose a threat. Whilst it is important to strengthen your own patent protection, it is also crucial to identify vulnerable points in competitors’ patent applications and attempt to steer their protection away from your products.  TPOs are generally a relatively cheap way to try and improve your FTO position, although they do have some downsides in practice.

Oppositions and Litigation

Post-grant proceedings are available before most major patent offices in which it is possible to attack a recently granted patent. There is often a strict deadline for filing an opposition, so monitoring competitor patent cases is key to make sure you can utilise these processes if needed.  Our team has significant experience in this area and can help strategise in such a situation.

Meanwhile, patents are enforced and/or can be attacked in court proceedings.  Litigation is typically costly and time-consuming and many start-up or scale-up companies will seek to avoid this option.  However,through competitor monitoring, the potential for future litigation can be evaluated and steps can be taken early on to put yourself in the best possible position.  The EIP Veriphy team includes experienced court litigators who can advise on best practices.

Licences

Identifying when you need to licence IP from a third party is also important.  Proactively approaching a third-party rights-holder to seek a licence will generally result in more favourable licence terms than if a product is launched and the rights holder notifies you of potential infringement.  In the latter scenario, licence negotiations are typically more adversarial!

Licence negotiations can be complex and we have a team of experienced commercial IP lawyers who can help. Having your own, strong patent portfolio can be a useful bargaining chip in such conversations.

The Latest Thought Leadership pieces in the Content Hub

No items found.
Stay in the Know

The Patent Strategist

Get expert insights and the top patent stories delivered straight to your inbox.

Heading
This is some text inside of a div block.
This is some text inside of a div block.

Latest Insights

Showing 0 of 100
Is Your AI Conversation Privileged?
08 May 2026
Recent US court decisions have, for the first time, tested whether conversations with AI tools can be protected by legal privilege. In United States v. Heppner, a court held that documents generated by a defendant using a public AI platform were not protected by attorney‑client privilege, largely because the AI was not used within a lawyer‑directed relationship and the platform’s terms allowed data retention and disclosure. By contrast, in Warner v. Gilbarco, another court found that AI‑assisted materials created by a self‑represented litigant were protected under the work‑product doctrine, which has a more forgiving standard for waiver.
#
Consulting
​
The evolution of nucleic acid sequencing and what it means for Genomics and IP
27 April 2026
This article outlines the evolution of nucleic acid sequencing, from early Sanger methods to next‑generation and long‑read technologies. The journey from deciphering individual DNA strands to sequencing entire genomes in hours represents one of biotechnology's most impressive transformations. The first human genome, completed through the Human Genome Project, took around 13 years to sequence and cost billions of dollars, whereas modern sequencing methods can now deliver a genome in hours for a few hundred dollars. For those interested in patents and life sciences, understanding the technical evolution of sequencing methods offers insights into how fundamental scientific advances translate into valuable patent portfolios.
#
Consulting
​
World IP Day: The big ideas shaping IP's fastest-moving fields
24 April 2026
For World IP Day, we asked experts of EIP’s five growth areas: Uniphy, Ampliphy, Stratiphy, Codiphy and Quantiphy, to share a quick insight on innovation, IP trends, and what excites them about the future. Each responded to a single, focused question reflecting the role their team plays across EIP.
#
Consulting
​
Meet the EIP team heading to INTA 2026 in London
23 April 2026
INTA's Annual Meeting is coming to London. From 2–6 May 2026, the ExCeL will host more than 10,000 trade mark and IP professionals from over 100 jurisdictions — five days of sessions, side events, and the kind of corridor conversations that turn into lasting working relationships.
#
Litigation
​
Antibody Patent Protection in Europe and the US: Navigating EPO and USPTO Differences
16 April 2026
This article explores the complexities of patenting antibody therapies, focusing on the differing requirements and practices of the European Patent Office (EPO) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It highlights how the scope of claims, inventiveness standards, and supporting data requirements vary between jurisdictions, and explains why a tailored IP strategy is essential for innovators especially SMEs seeking protection in both Europe and the US. The article also outlines how EIP’s transatlantic teams collaborate to optimise patent applications for success in these key markets.
#
Patenting
​
Why competitor patent monitoring is critical to your drug development strategy
15 April 2026
This article explains why competitor IP monitoring is a critical part of an effective drug development strategy. By tracking competitor patent activity, companies can assess freedom to operate, identify risks and opportunities early, and make informed decisions on patent filings, licensing, and investment readiness. Ongoing monitoring also supports FTO analysis, third‑party observations, oppositions, and litigation strategy, helping life sciences businesses protect value and reduce risk throughout development.
#
Consulting
​
Biopharma Strategy in 2026: Lessons from 2025 on AI, M&A and the UPC
13 April 2026
This article looks back on a selection of key trends in the (bio)pharma industry in 2025 and looks ahead to how these may continue to develop into 2026.
#
Consulting
​
Thinking about IP from day one: strategic considerations for deep tech startups
08 April 2026
For deep tech startups, intellectual property decisions often come too late or cost too much too soon. This article explores why IP strategy should be considered from day one, even if formal protection comes later. It outlines how founders can decide what to patent, when trade secrets may be more appropriate, and how detectability, enforceability and cost should shape early choices. With a focus on practicality and commercial alignment, it also looks at how newer, AI‑assisted approaches can help startups take a more cost‑effective and flexible approach to building meaningful IP protection.
#
Consulting
​
National offices report increases in national patent applications throughout Europe: Is the EPO no longer “killing” the national offices?
27 March 2026
National patent offices across Europe have reported a marked increase in patent filings in 2025, breaking with a long‑standing downward trend. Data from Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Austria, Spain and Norway point to growing activity driven by digital technologies, electrification and increased university participation. At the same time, offices report a rise in self‑drafted and AI‑assisted applications, which may lower barriers to entry but also raise concerns about application quality and examination efficiency.
#
Patenting
​
Make your bio(pharma) IP investment ready
22 March 2026
This recap of our LinkedIn Live series focuses on helping (bio)pharma businesses make their IP investment‑ready. Across three sessions, experts will discuss building resilient IP portfolios, making strategic IP decisions ahead of funding rounds, and what the evolving 2026 (bio)pharma landscape means for long‑term IP strategy.
#
Patenting
​
Are professional guidelines making Patent Attorneys too cautious on AI?
19 February 2026
As AI use accelerates in patent practice, many European patent attorneys remain cautious due to professional AI guidelines from the epi. This article argues those guidelines are not a barrier, but a baseline for responsible use.
#
Patenting
​
Provisional Agreement Reached on the EU Pharma Package: Takeaways for Pharmaceutical Companies
17 February 2026
The EU’s new Pharma Package will overhaul regulatory exclusivity, orphan drug incentives, antimicrobial innovation, and generic entry pathways, reducing standard protection periods while introducing new rewards like transferable exclusivity vouchers.
#
Patenting
​
Beyond CRISPR: Precision to Platform
23 January 2026
Gene editing is entering a new phase, moving beyond CRISPR-Cas9’s breakthrough but costly, bespoke therapies toward more precise and scalable platforms. While CRISPR-based treatments like Casgevy have proven clinical success, they remain expensive and entangled in ongoing patent disputes over foundational IP. Next-generation tools such as base editing and prime editing avoid double-strand DNA breaks, enabling more accurate corrections and broader therapeutic potential. The field’s focus is now shifting to disease-agnostic platforms that can be adapted across many conditions, improving access and efficiency.
#
Patenting
​
Confidentiality at the UPC: What litigants need to know
21 January 2026
This article explains how the Unified Patent Court approaches confidentiality in litigation, outlining the procedures for restricting access to sensitive information, how confidentiality clubs are formed, and when hearings may be held in private. It highlights key case law shaping these rules, the balance between fair trial rights and protection of commercial data, and the penalties for breaches. Practical guidance is provided to help parties navigate applications, manage confidential documents, and understand what to expect throughout UPC proceedings.
#
Litigation
​
EPO fees are going up in April 2026: Plan ahead now
19 January 2026
The European Patent Office will introduce a fee increase of roughly 5% from 1 April 2026, affecting search, examination, designation and renewal fees. Filing, excess page, opposition and appeal fees remain unchanged. Some costs—such as renewal fees—can be paid up to three months early, allowing applicants to secure the current lower rates. EIP recommends reviewing your portfolio ahead of the deadline.
#
Patenting
​