Sometimes what begins as a technical disagreement can escalate into a complex IP dispute. This was illustrated in a recent mediation before the EUIPO Mediation Centre, where unmet manufacturing quality requirements triggered a conflict between the parties.

The dispute involved Dr. Varga, an inventor behind a proprietary physiotherapy method marketed as TRI‑MOOBIL Therapy, and MoWo Medical S.L., the manufacturer responsible for producing the corresponding electromedical device. Dr. Varga owned several national and EU trade marks for the abbreviation TMB, as well as an European patent protecting the device.

After multiple defective units were delivered, the Inventor sued for breach of contract. The situation escalated further when MoWo redesigned the device and launched an improved version, marketed under the name MoWo TMB, using the same three‑letter sign to indicate compatibility with the therapy. Patent and trade mark infringement proceedings followed, alongside counterclaims for patent invalidity and national trade mark revocation, including a parallel action before the EUIPO based on genericide of the EU “TMB” trade marks, as indeed the sign had become customary among consumers to designate the newly created therapy. Within months, the dispute had fragmented into costly, high‑risk litigation across several forums. At this point, in the context of the pending revocation proceedings before the EUIPO, the EUIPO Mediation Centre proposed mediation.

From Legal Positions to Human Interests

When the mediation began, trust was low. The Inventor felt her innovation had been misused. The Manufacturer felt trapped between commercial necessity and legal exposure. The mediator’s first challenge was therefore not legal analysis, but restoring communication. Through private meetings and carefully managed joint sessions, the mediator allowed both sides to express frustration without confrontation. Accusations were reframed into underlying concerns. What emerged was a clearer picture of interests: protection and recognition on one side, legal certainty and market access on the other.

The mediator also guided the parties through a realistic assessment of litigation costs and risks, addressing factors such as uncertain outcomes and proceedings likely to extend beyond two years. This helped shift the parties’ focus from pursuing claims to identifying workable solutions.

Delivering Meaningful Outcomes for the Parties

The mediation resulted in a comprehensive agreement. MoWo paid a lump sum to settle the contract dispute. Dr. Varga granted a non‑exclusive patent licence for the improved device, with royalties on sales, while all invalidity claims were withdrawn. A narrowly defined licence for descriptive use of the TMB trade mark allowed continued market use under strict conditions. All proceedings -national and EU‑level- were terminated. The result preserved IP rights, ensured ongoing revenue, and provided legal certainty for both sides.

This case highlights what mediation can achieve in IP disputes: not only settlements, but renewed dialogue. By addressing legal complexity alongside the parties’ lack of trust, mediation created space for flexible, party-driven outcomes that litigation alone could not provide.

Source: From Conflict to Recovery: ‘Healing’ IP disputes with Mediation - EUIPO