Rainer Boehm

Rainer Böhm

Attorney-at-law
Certified Intellectual Property Attorney
Representative before the UPC

Rainer Böhm

Attorney-at-law
Certified Intellectual Property Attorney
Representative before the UPC

Rainer Böhm’s main fields of activity are trademark law and the law of marks and signs, IT law, Internet/multimedia law, outsourcing, patent law/know-how law, advertising law and competition law. He has special expertise in the field of licensing law, including anti-trust law. His activities in the patent law field mainly pertain to international litigation, especially in the USA and India.

Handelsblatt/Best Lawyers ranks Rainer Böhm as one of Germany’s best lawyers 2024 in the fields of Intellectual Property Law and Litigation. The specialist legal publisher JUVE mentions Rainer Böhm as “recommended” in its ranking for trademarks and unfair competition 2022/2023 (“very constructive”, competitor). The magazine World Trademark Review lists Rainer Böhm as one of the “recommended individuals” in its rankings: “A gifted litigator”, “sharp strategic dealmaker” and “sound adviser in prosecution” (2021). “A repository of trust for clients” (2022). “Rainer is a go-to adviser for German matters. He provides excellent, comprehensive strategies, which yield favourable outcomes for clients. He is also a sharp litigation expert” (2023). “He is an outstanding litigator and has handled high-profile disputes for many international clients. He can obtain injunctions like nobody else in a trademark dispute” (2024).

Since 2019, IAM Strategy 300 recognises Rainer Böhm as one of the “World’s Leading IP Strategists”: “Flexing outstanding expertise in the IP, licensing, antitrust and litigation areas, Rainer Böhm stands out as a percipient all-round patent strategist. Having cultivated excellent connections internationally, he is ideally placed to solve complex cross-border problems” (2020). “Rainer Böhm protects and enforces his clients’ rights in a uniquely creative and highly effective manner. He demonstrates impeccable attention to detail and an exceptional intellect – and is an absolute pleasure to collaborate with” (2021).

Rainer Böhm speaks German and English.

Fields of Practice

  • Patent litigation
  • Soft IP litigation
  • IT law
  • Internet/multimedia law
  • Outsourcing
  • Know-how law
  • Advertising law
  • Competition law
  • Licensing law
  • Anti-trust law

CV

Degree studies in Jurisprudence at the universities of Hamburg and Munich. Admitted to the bar since 1995, initially in the law firm of Haarmann, Hemmelrath & Partners, Düsseldorf, since 1997 at Eisenführ Speiser, Hamburg, Partner.

Lecturer in Competition Law at the Hamburg School of Business Administration (HSBA), lectures regularly for the American Bar Association.

Memberships

  • Hanseatic Bar Association Hamburg
  • Life Sciences Committee of the Licensing Executive Society
  • European Patent Lawyers Association (EPLAW)
  • International Bar Association
  • German Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (GRUR)
  • European Patent Litigators Association (EPLIT)
  • INTA Copyright Committee 2020-2021
  • MARQUES European Trade Mark Law and Practice Team

Publications & Presentations

Recent Case Law in German Trademark Law 2020

published by Eisenführ Speiser

Download

Verwechslungsgefahr bei nur geringer, aber bei den fraglichen Waren besonders relevanter klanglicher Zeichenähnlichkeit

GRUR-Prax 2021, 136

further author: Nicole Dekker

Partial designs

AIPPI Study Question 2018, Further contributors: Sabine Kossak, Hanna Held, Mary-Rose McGuire, Jürgen Kroher, Björn Joachim, Jens Künzel

Patent Litigation in Germany, American Bar Association

Section of Litigation – Intellectual Property Litigation Committee, Spring 2013 newsletter

Zustellung einer vor einem US-Gericht ­anhängigen Klage - Zustellung einer Klage aus dem Ausland

Anmerkung zu BverfG, 09.01.2013 - 2 BvR 2805/12, GRUR Int. 2013, 494 ff. Englische Fassung: No escape from being sued abroad. Marie Charlotte Reddemann; Rainer Böhm, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2013 8: 566-566

This website uses cookies

This website uses cookies to provide and analyse our services. By continuing to use the site, you consent to this use. In our privacy policy you will learn more about the use of your data and your rights.

Save Cancel Accept Reject Privacy policy