LYNCH·LLP
◈ INDUSTRIES / BIOTECH

Engineering-side
life sciences.

Medical devices, diagnostics, instrumentation, and digital health — IP work tuned for the engineering side of life sciences.

// 01 / IP CHALLENGES IN THIS SECTOR

What we see, day to day.

01 / CHALLENGE
Patentable subject matter under § 101
Diagnostic-method claims need careful drafting to survive § 101 / Mayo scrutiny.
02 / CHALLENGE
Disclosure timing vs. publication pressure
Academic founders need to publish; investors need filed priority. We thread that needle without losing rights.
03 / CHALLENGE
Freedom-to-operate at regulatory milestones
FTO opinions before FDA pre-submission, 510(k) clearance, and commercial launch — each scoped to what investors and partners actually ask.
04 / CHALLENGE
Platform vs. product claim strategy
Genus claims for the platform, species claims for the lead product, continuation strategy for what's coming next.
// 02 / WHAT WE DO HERE

Services tuned to biotech.

// 04 / RELATED PRACTICES

Where this work lives.

// FAQ

Frequently asked questions about biotech IP.

  • What IP issues are unique to biotech?
    Biotech IP work sits at the intersection of § 101 subject-matter eligibility (especially after Mayo for diagnostic-method eligibility), disclosure-vs-publication tension between academic founders and investors, freedom-to-operate at clinical milestones, and platform-vs-product claim strategy. Lynch LLP works on each of these in parallel: drafting that survives § 101 scrutiny, FTO scoped to the gates investors actually ask about, and continuation strategy that captures both the platform genus and the lead-asset species.
  • How does Lynch LLP approach patent-filing timing in biotech?
    Filing strategy in biotech turns on the interaction between disclosure events, investor diligence gates, and FDA device milestones. Lynch LLP maps that interaction for medical-device, diagnostic, imaging, and digital-health companies and builds a 12–36 month roadmap around it, sequencing provisional, PCT, and continuation filings against the platform-and-product claim picture.
  • How do we approach freedom-to-operate analysis in biotech?
    Lynch LLP scopes FTO opinions to the questions that biotech stakeholders actually ask: pre-clinical FTO before Phase 1, clinical-asset FTO before Phase 3, and commercial FTO before launch. Each pass identifies blocking patents, evaluates design-around or licensing options, and is documented to a level appropriate for board, investor, or partner review without overshooting into expensive opinion-writing where it isn't needed.
  • How does our experience in biotech differ from a general-practice firm?
    Three things distinguish our biotech work from a general-practice firm. First, our attorneys have engineering backgrounds — mechanical and electrical. That's the right depth for the device, instrumentation, and digital-health side of biotech, where claim drafting depends on understanding how the system is built. Second, the attorney you meet is the attorney doing the work. Strategic decisions happen with the lawyer you briefed at intake — not handed off to a junior staffer to execute somebody else's plan. Third, we coordinate U.S. and international filings as a single strategy. Biotech deployment markets — EU, Japan, China, Korea — vary by product line and regulatory pathway. Our 12-to-36-month patent roadmaps align with FDA 510(k) / De Novo / PMA milestones rather than treating prosecution as a series of disconnected actions.
◈ BIOTECH IP

Bring us your biotech portfolio.

Book a consultation →View case studies