Back to Intellectual Property

The team at CMS Francis Lefebvre Avocats can assist you with your patent law issues. Our team of lawyers based in Paris is well experienced in the following fields: 

Litigation: Saisie-contrefaçons” counterfeit seizures, Infringement actions, in particular in summary proceedings, unfair competition and parasitism, disputes related to trade secrets, Actions for patent/SPC invalidation or declaration of non-infringement and Litigation related to employee inventions.

Advice and drafting contracts: R&D contracts, relationships with inventors, Filing strategy, portfolio audit, valuation, technology transfer, Assignment, licensing or co-ownership agreements.

Most of the matters have cross-border aspects and require close coordination with actions carried out abroad.

Our team is used to working in several technical fields, in particular in the pharmaceutical and health products fields (also has good knowledge of the regulatory framework applicable to these products), but also in the fields of electronics, mechanics or consumer products. 

This experience  complements an excellent knowledge of other complex disputes such as trade secrets infringement (particularly technical know-how) or unfair competition and/or parasitism

Our team is part of the CMS network of over 150 lawyers, legal experts and specialists advisors in 33 countries. It allows us to propose a global strategy in adequacy with the needs of our customers. This particular  know-how is set to become more importantwith the arrival of the Unified Patent Court and the Unitary Patent.

Awards & rankings


L500 tier 4

“CMS has an excellent IP patents team. Jean-Baptiste Thiénot and Sabine Rigaud -in particular- form a very high level counsel duo, with a lot of experience and particularly rare dynamism.”


EPO re­fuses pat­ent ap­plic­a­tion with ma­chine in­vent­or
The EPO Board of Ap­peal have pub­lished their writ­ten de­cision in case J 8/20 in re­la­tion to the AI ma­chine DABUS, find­ing that a ma­chine can­not be an in­vent­or for the pur­poses of ap­ply­ing for pat­ents...
More de­tail has be­come avail­able about how to as­sess pat­entab­il­ity of com­puter...
In March 2021 the En­larged Board of Ap­peal of the European Pat­ent Of­fice answered ques­tions con­cern­ing pat­entab­il­ity of com­puter soft­ware sim­u­la­tions in case G1/19. A Tech­nic­al Board of Ap­peal has ap­plied...
What next for de­scrip­tion re­vi­sions at the European Pat­ent Of­fice?
The European Pat­ent Of­fice (EPO) typ­ic­ally re­quire pat­ent de­scrip­tions to be re­vised to agree with the claims of the pat­ent ap­plic­a­tion.  In March 2021 the EPO Guidelines were re­vised to add that em­bod­i­ments...
Re­form of the re­gime for in­ven­tions and soft­ware of non-em­ploy­ees col­lab­or­at­ors
The French In­tel­lec­tu­al Prop­erty Code (IPC) provides, un­der cer­tain con­di­tions, for an auto­mat­ic vest­ing in the em­ploy­er of in­tel­lec­tu­al prop­erty rights on in­ven­tions and soft­ware of em­ploy­ees and pub­lic...
UPC: Is it fi­nally here?
New tem­por­ary pro­vi­sions at the European Pat­ent Of­fice re­lat­ing to the Unit­ary Pat­ent The European Pat­ent Of­fice (EPO) is­sued 3 new no­tices on 19 Janu­ary 2022 about the Unit­ary Pat­ent. They are:...
COV­ID and ViCo: The End?
En­larged Board of Ap­peal de­cision G1/21 Back­ground Fol­low­ing an EPO press re­lease on 16 Ju­ly 2021, the En­larged Board of Ap­peal’s (EBA) de­cision on video­con­fer­en­cing (ViCo) was re­leased last week. We...
Arm­chair in­ven­tions: plaus­ib­il­ity at the EPO
Will it get harder to use post-filed data at the European Pat­ent Of­fice (EPO)? The is­sue of plaus­ib­il­ity has now been form­ally re­ferred to the highest ju­di­cial au­thor­ity at the EPO to cla­ri­fy the cir­cum­stances...
Double pat­ent­ing: leg­al fact or fic­tion? (G4/19)
The En­larged Board of Ap­peal (EBA) has this week re­leased its de­cision re­gard­ing the is­sue of double pat­ent­ing. The concept of double pat­ent­ing will be fa­mil­i­ar to those work­ing in the pat­ent field. It...
European Pat­ent Of­fice Ap­peal Board de­cision on ‘product-by-pro­cess’ bis­pe­cif­ic...
European Pat­ent Of­fice De­cision T0032/17 has some in­ter­est­ing points to note on the dis­clos­ure of tech­nic­al fea­tures con­ferred by hy­bridoma de­pos­it in­form­a­tion and the bur­den of proof in re­la­tion to product-by-pro­cess...
EPO ap­proach to ex­amin­ing com­puter im­ple­men­ted in­ven­tions
On Tues­day 25 May 2021, Heli Pih­la­jamaa, dir­ect­or of pat­ent law at the European Pat­ent Of­fice, gave a present­a­tion to CIPA’s com­puter tech­no­logy com­mit­tee on the Pat­entab­il­ity of com­puter-im­ple­men­ted...
Video­con­fer­ence or­al pro­ceed­ings be­fore The European Pat­ent Of­fice (G1/21)
The European Pat­ent Of­fice (EPO) was due to hear the re­fer­ral in G1/21 on Fri­day 28 May 2021 con­cern­ing the ques­tion of wheth­er the con­duct of or­al pro­ceed­ings in the form of a video­con­fer­ence is com­pat­ible...
Some leaks can­'t be fixed
“Con­fid­en­tial in­form­a­tion is like an ice cube... give it to the party who has no re­fri­ger­at­or or will not agree to keep it in one, and by the time of the tri­al you have just a pool of wa­ter.” This...