Abbott’s latest UPC victories demonstrate how patent enforcement continues to shape the CGM market
Over the first half of this year, Abbott Diabetes Care (Abbott) secured two wins at the Unified Patent Court (UPC) against the Chinese medical device manufacturer, Sinacore, and their distribution partner Menarini. The first came with a ruling issued in March 2026 by the UPC Court of Appeal, which upheld a preliminary injunction originally granted by the Hague Local Division. This dispute revolves around unitary patent EP4344633 which protects the sensor assembly in Abbott’s continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices. The second win was also secured at the UPC Court of Appeal, who issued an order in April 2026 that set aside an earlier Hague Local Division refusal of provisional measures concerning unitary patent EP3988471 (EP’471). This patent protects aspects of Abbott’s CGM user interface, including the home screen, alerts, and a timeline graph where glucose readings are shown alongside event indicators. In both cases, Abbott accused Sinocare’s ‘GlucoMen iCan’ system of infringing, which in the case of EP’471 includes Sinocare’s ‘iCan App’.
These decisions land in a market that in recent years has seen Abbott step away from litigation against its closest competitor in this area – Dexcom. In December 2024, Abbott and Dexcom announced a global settlement covering CGM related disputes worldwide, with all pending court and patent office matters to be dismissed. The agreement includes a 10-year commitment not to litigate patent disputes against each other. A press release from Abbott regarding the matter stated there were no financial payments as part of the settlement from either Abbott or Dexcom, and that Abbott “considers this agreement a positive development”.
With the Dexcom chapter quietened, Abbott’s enforcement activity in Europe appears to be centred on preventing European market entry from overseas competitors, including actions against their European distribution partners. Alongside the ongoing Sinocare and Menarini disputes, Abbott have also pursued other CGM supply chains in the Hague Local Division of the UPC, obtaining a provisional injunction in early 2026 concerning a CGM patent asserted against Chinese manufacturer MicroTech.
These decisions reinforce the importance of a strong and enforceable patent portfolio for key market participants. Abbott is actively using its patents to delay or constrain competitor entry into the European CGM market, while maintaining flexibility as disputes evolve.
At the same time, the Abbott–Dexcom settlement illustrates that long-running patent disputes can ultimately be resolved where both parties prioritise certainty and commercial predictability. Whether a similar outcome will emerge in the ongoing disputes with Sinocare remains to be seen. The availability of UPC‑wide injunctions and penalty‑backed relief increases settlement pressure, but the ultimate resolution is likely to depend on the availability of viable design‑around options, the importance of timely European market entry, and each party’s appetite for continued litigation risk.
If you would like to continue the conversation about patent enforcement, please contact one of the authors, Amy Cole-King or Scott King, or another member of the MedTech team.
