TiPLab Files for IPO: Strategic Patent Services Powering Biotech Innovation

On December 16, 2022, at the annual meeting of the New Drug Founders Club in Shanghai, Zhang Zheng, co-founder of TiPLab and a patent attorney, had just stepped off the stage after concluding a panel discussion when several attendees approached to greet him and seek business discussions.

“We have new clients reaching out to us every day,” said Zhang Cheng. “Demand for our services is substantial; in fact, we have consistently operated below capacity, which is regrettable, as we often have to turn away clients.” Consequently, she rarely participates in external promotional activities.

TiPLab has not felt the chill of the downturn, but Zhang Cheng can sense the difficulties faced by biotech clients.Amid the winter chill, clients face many difficult questions during investment due diligence. She also clearly sensed that they were under significant financial pressure.

Established in 2016, TiPLab rode the wave of rapid growth in the biopharmaceutical industry. At the time, Zhang Cheng believed that the development of innovative drugs would inevitably drive up demand for IP services. Given the high level of specialization required in the intellectual property field, domestic innovative drug companies often struggled to find suitable partners. By maintaining closer proximity to clients, facilitating more thorough communication, and delivering specialized IP services, “we could fill this market gap.”

Innovative products in the biotechnology sector have long life cycles, and corporate development occurs in stages; companies are not always in a phase of high innovation activity. However,For a considerable period, the company had no other tangible assets.IP is its sole value proposition.. A well-constructed portfolio can help biotech companies secure financing more smoothly. Although mergers and acquisitions remain limited in China’s domestic industry, both license-in and license-out activities are highly active. In essence, all licensing transactions involve the buying and selling of intellectual property (IP).

Currently, TiPLab’s core research-based intellectual property services include Freedom to Operate (FTO) risk control, intellectual property due diligence in commercial activities, and strategic patenting for global patent asset creation, which essentially cover the needs of innovative enterprises and investors.

However, project schedules have consistently remained extremely tight, with the team’s growth rate failing to keep pace with the surge in demand, which indirectly indicates thatThe rapid emergence of new technologies and industries has driven a steep increase in the demand for patent services.。“This year, we are focusing—focusing even more sharply.” TiPLab is now further concentrating on its core patent services.

In fact, when TiPLab was first founded, it had no existing clients, let alone established business operations or projected cash flow. The decision to start the company was not data-driven; Zhang Cheng trusted her intuition. By nature, she is unafraid of risk. “I am not a risk-averse person; I thrive on challenges. Entrepreneurship requires embracing uncertainty. If you can control the downside and understand the worst-case scenario, greater uncertainty may actually work in your favor.”

Zhang Cheng is the most in-demand and rare type of interdisciplinary talent in the industry,Possesses an interdisciplinary educational background in biotechnology and law. Prior to founding the company, served as a patent attorney specializing in biotechnology at a major law firm, with a strong interest in the intersection of intellectual property, technology, and law.

We spoke with Zhang Cheng about the patent needs of innovative industries, the essence of patent services, andWhat valuable perspective do patents provide, enabling innovators to continually ask “that toughest question”?

VBMed:Has the capital winter affected TiPLab's business?

Zhang Cheng:From a business perspective, we have not felt the chill of an economic downturn. In fact, our client base has been growing steadily, with particularly rapid growth from 2018 to 2020. Currently, we are approached by new clients every day. Regrettably, due to persistent capacity constraints, we have had to decline some customer requests.

VBHealthcare:When TiPLab was established in 2016, were there already any professional intellectual property service agencies in China that served innovative drug companies?

Zhang Cheng:From my observation, there are no highly specialized firms; most are comprehensive in nature. Comprehensive law firms adopt a very broad categorization for patent attorneys’ practice areas, which may encompass new materials, energy, chemicals, and even petroleum. As a result, patent attorneys often have limited industry-specific knowledge and tend to focus on purely legal work. In contrast, we prioritize understanding clients’ needs from an industry perspective, which requires close collaboration with the relevant sectors.

VBNewMed:What are the ways to establish close collaboration with clients?

Zhang Cheng:Communication, and continuous communication. Our work involves navigating significant uncertainty, with many client requests lacking ready-made solutions for reference—some have never been addressed before, requiring us to rethink approaches from the ground up. Clients have placed considerable trust in us and provided valuable opportunities, enabling our learning and growth throughout this process. For instance, in areas where we previously lacked direct experience, candid communication with clients fostered their willingness to jointly explore new avenues. These collaborative efforts have helped us clearly define our capabilities and limitations.

VB New Medicine:What Can Be Done, and What Cannot?

Zhang Cheng:We exclude many business areas, such as non-core intellectual property services. Instead, we focus primarily on patent-related work that is closely tied to technology. In essence, we have consistently offered only two types of services: portfolio management and risk management.

VB New Medicine:Will corporate needs change as the broader industrial landscape evolves?

Zhang Cheng:I believe that, in essence, nothing has changed. On one hand, you need to create patent barriers to hinder competitors; on the other hand, you must navigate around the obstacles erected by your competitors. Both are direct demands arising from the nature of patent rights.

VBNewMed：Are biotech companies and investment firms your primary clients, and do they have the same needs?

Zhang Cheng:In essence, the perspective is the same. From the rights holder’s standpoint, biotech companies seek assets that are high-quality, stable, and valuable, with no risks during commercialization. From the investor’s standpoint, they expect the core assets of their primary portfolio companies to be high-quality, stable, and valuable, and free from infringement risks during commercialization.

VCBeat New Medicine:What are the respective patent needs of biotech companies at different stages, such as startups or those in the growth phase?

Zhang Cheng:Most of our clients are startups or research institutes within large corporations. During periods of explosive innovation or in the early stages of innovation, their output consists primarily of innovative projects, meaning that a very high proportion of these projects are in the preclinical stage.

Of course, biotech companies do not exist solely for R&D; they must ultimately deliver products. At certain stages, enterprises need to concentrate resources on portfolio building. At other stages, they must pay particular attention to freedom-to-operate (FTO) issues, especially when approaching commercialization.

From the perspective of resource allocation, we conduct more research and analysis during the project initiation phase. The intermediate stage focuses on execution and implementation, specifically whether the previously established strategies are being carried out. Prior to commercialization, greater attention is paid to risk management, as the product is preparing for market launch.

But fundamentally, it remains the same, as the entire drug development process involves continuously mitigating and controlling risks.

VB New Medicine:Do we segment customers by technical domain?

Zhang Cheng:Of course, we hope to have highly specialized talent in every technical direction. However, understanding technology is only one aspect; you also need to understand the commercialization path of this product type, and even grasp the development of the entire industry.Patent work is not merely a technical issue; it is, more importantly, a business strategy within a competitive landscape.

VCBeat New Medicine:How long will it take us to analyze what customers’ true needs actually are?

Zhang Cheng:This is an excellent question. Initially, we devote considerable time to understanding the client’s true needs, often spending the first two or three meetings solely on this exploration. Throughout the project lifecycle, our comprehension of these requirements continues to deepen; in fact, it may not be until the moment of delivery that you fully discern what the client truly needs—and what they do not.

VCBeat New Medicine:Does the customer know what they need?

Zhang Cheng:I have always believed that all clients know exactly what they want; however, there is often a discrepancy between what they articulate and what they truly intend. What I hear may differ from what they express, and my interpretation may diverge from what I hear. Consequently, the final deliverable I provide may not align with the information the client receives.

Are our interpretations of the requirements truly aligned with the clients’ underlying needs? There is often a gap, leaving considerable room for interpretation. This represents the most challenging aspect of our work: fostering thorough, bidirectional communication with clients. Clients may propose highly specific action plans, but we must look beyond these to discern their true underlying needs. In many cases, clients describe concepts, and it is incumbent upon us to fully grasp these concepts.

VCBeat New Medicine:Can you provide an example?

Zhang Cheng:For instance, a client might say, “I want to develop a patent portfolio strategy.” But what exactly does “patent portfolio strategy” mean? What specific arrangements are involved? What outcomes are ultimately desired, and what problems need to be solved? The client’s mental model may differ from my understanding. Therefore, it is necessary to continuously probe into the essence of their needs and repeatedly confirm with the client: “Is this what you want? Or is this not what you want?”

VCBeat New Medicine:For example, during the project initiation phase of the pipeline, do we directly inform clients whether they can proceed with project initiation?

Zhang Cheng:Of course, we certainly cannot tell clients whether or not to initiate a project; we cannot make decisions on their behalf. Instead, we provide decision-making recommendations from an intellectual property (IP) perspective, enabling them to more thoroughly consider their choices. For instance, if you continue developing this pipeline, to what extent can you secure exclusivity? Will such exclusivity help you achieve your commercial objectives? If the scope of your protected territory is very narrow, competitors will still be able to engage in robust competition.

Moreover, there could be substantial infringement risks; resolving these issues would incur significant costs. When weighing your returns against your investments, is this still a prudent decision?

VCBeat New Medicine:What is the final product form in which patent services are delivered?

Zhang Cheng:At the core are two offerings: FTO analysis and patent landscaping. While we refer to them as our products, what we actually deliver are solutions. Our service process is not heavily reliant on tangible deliverables; problem-solving takes precedence. Your project presentation may take the form of a PowerPoint deck, but the PPT itself is merely a vehicle. The medium is less important than the message it conveys—the information itself is what truly matters.

VCBeat New Medicine:What Makes a Product Truly Valuable?

Zhang Cheng:Actionable, implementable, and valuable solutions. If I present a client with a polished PowerPoint deck filled with data and charts but offering recommendations detached from their actual circumstances, leaving them unclear about what to do or why to do it, then in my view, it holds little meaning.

There is only one criterion for measuring value: whether the client acted on your advice and whether that action ultimately generated commercial value. For instance, did the client secure financing smoothly or navigate the product licensing process with ease as a result of portfolio construction? Did they truly mitigate certain risks by choosing a lower-risk path?

VBBeat New Medicine:From the perspectives of patent strategy or risk control, what should early-stage biotech companies do during a winter period?

Zhang Cheng:Companies need to give more thought to what they should and should not do. If selecting three pipelines out of ten, which three should be chosen? This requires considering what the differentiation truly is, whether competitive advantages can be reflected in these three pipelines, and whether the risks are also relatively low.

When capital is abundant, you may not engage in such meticulous trade-offs; in a downturn, rational strategic judgment becomes more critical. Of course, considerations at the IP level are one factor supporting rational decision-making.

Artery New Medicine：What Changes Have New Technologies Brought to Patent Work?

Zhang Cheng:With the new modality, replication becomes extremely difficult due to the inherent complexity of manufacturing. Even in the absence of patent protection, it is highly challenging for competitors to develop an identical product. The intrinsic complexity of the industry diminishes the relative importance of patents compared to the past.

However, on another level, as product complexity increases, greater attention must be paid to infringement risks. No company can achieve originality in every aspect; if a product is entirely novel from a regulatory perspective, it may raise significant concerns among regulatory authorities, thereby complicating its commercialization pathway. Therefore, a balance must be struck. In other words, you inevitably need to incorporate certain existing technologies developed by others. Under such circumstances, how can you identify a safe and compliant route? How should resources be allocated? Which components warrant patent applications, and are they suitable for patent protection? The number of trade-offs and decisions required has, in fact, increased.

Overall, competition has become more complex. Of course, there are many competitive strategies available; patents are not the only means.

VCBeat New Medicine:It has been argued that the intellectual property (IP) system in the biotechnology sector is more complex and ambiguous. There is often uncertainty regarding what is patentable and what is not. The most valuable IP typically resides not in a specific molecule, but in data, understanding, and insights; securing patent protection for such knowledge can be significantly more challenging. What is your perspective on this?

Zhang Cheng:In the biopharmaceutical industry, insights into the essence of business and how competitive advantages are manifested must ultimately be translated into concrete decisions: what specific molecule to develop and what its application scenarios are. These considerations can be formulated into technical solutions. Theoretically, any aspect visible to competitors can be protected through intellectual property rights, such as patents. Therefore, I do not perceive any technical difficulties in this regard.

VB New Medicine:What perspective on industry observation has working in patents provided you?

Zhang Cheng:We will approach innovation from a more fundamental dimension. Since our work is to help clients strengthen their protections and maintain their competitive advantages, I am compelled to think,What exactly constitutes a competitive advantage? In other words, how significant is its level of innovation or originality?

This is a very tough question that many people are unwilling or unable to answer; however, we will continue to discuss it with our clients.Because patent work involves addressing more abstract, fundamental, and core value issues in commercial competition, rather than merely implementation-level concerns.

VBNewMed:In the biopharmaceutical industry, is the core issue of value simply whether there is innovation?

Zhang Cheng:And more importantly, what are the specific advantages of your product or technology compared to your competitors?

VBNewMed:In other words, investors have a particular need for patent-based analysis of companies.

Zhang Cheng:Yes, I believe that enterprises themselves need to constantly return to their essence. Companies face many very practical issues, such as project advancement and whether product manufacturing processes are feasible, which are all realistic challenges.However, precisely because clients often consider issues of feasibility, the more core and fundamental questions lose focus.Including when we start our own businesses and establish companies, it is essentially the same.

VBNewMed:Since 2015, the industry has exhibited clear cyclical patterns. From a patent perspective—that is, at the more fundamental level of value—does this cyclicality still persist?

Zhang Cheng:We have gained an early glimpse of certain trends.Most entrepreneurs prioritize patent considerations from the outset. Analysis of our limited customer sample reveals insights into market dynamics: Are activities fragmented or concentrated? Is there intense hyper-competition (“involution”)? Are there substantial sources of original innovation? For instance, as early as 2015 and 2016, we observed significant demand converging on the PD-1 field and engaged with numerous related projects. Similarly, in the case of CAR-T, we had already developed deep expertise in this domain two to three years before the industry’s broader emergence.

In the three to four years prior to 2020, most players were focused on figuring out how to validate their technological pathways, often opting for relatively safe directions in terms of product selection. However, with many technologies maturing and the robust growth of CROs and CDMOs, engineering-related challenges have diminished significantly, making it difficult to gain a substantial competitive edge solely through engineering capabilities. Consequently, startups are increasingly shifting their focus toward innovation beyond engineering, questioning what they should truly pursue in this non-engineering domain.

We have observed changes.Since 2020, there has indeed been a growing number of individuals engaging in source innovation, with newer technologies and inventions emerging, and significant integration across interdisciplinary fields.

We have indeed observed a growing number of small biotech companies that are more focused on product development and project initiation. One of our clients, in particular, stands out as highly interesting: we began discussing their project initiation strategy when the company was still in the incubation phase, with only one or two employees and not yet formally established. Now, their product has entered clinical trials.

VCBeat New Medicine:Most readers of this article are entrepreneurs in the field of biologics, orInvestors, if you wish to convey the value of patent work to them, what is the single most core message you would want to communicate?

Zhang Cheng:What I most want to convey is that, when developing patent portfolios or strategies, you should center on your core commercial objectives to determine how to allocate resources and execute implementation. By taking a more forward-looking approach to these issues, you will achieve a better return on investment.