Intellectual Property Report May 2026
Q2 2025 through Q2 2026 · 1,040 Tracked Moves
By the Numbers
The intellectual property lateral market recorded 1,040 attorney moves from Q2 2025 through the early weeks of Q2 2026. IP is a technically specialized market with distinct geographic centers—Washington DC, California, and New York each account for meaningful shares of total movement—and an unusually high rate of in-house exits driven by demand from technology and pharmaceutical companies. The breadth of sub-specialties, from patent prosecution and litigation to trademark, licensing, and technology transactions, means IP candidates carry highly differentiated profiles that require precision matching.
The 56.6% title change rate is the second highest across all five practice areas tracked, reflecting the diversity of firm types in the IP market—from boutique patent prosecution shops and ITC-focused practices to full-service Am Law platforms—each with their own title conventions. An attorney moving from a boutique to an Am Law firm, or vice versa, will almost always carry a different title on arrival.
Firms Moving Together
IP produced some of the most concentrated team lifts in the entire dataset. Three group moves stand out for drawing the majority of their attorneys from a single source firm—a level of consolidation that is unusual even by the standards of an active lateral market.
Sheppard Mullin — September 2025: The most concentrated team lift in the IP dataset. All 10 attorneys who joined in a single month came from Ropes & Gray, representing a near-complete extraction of a practice group from one firm to another.
Greenberg Traurig — October 2025: 9 attorneys joined from a diverse range of firms including O'Melveny & Myers, Haynes and Boone, Perkins Coie, Dentons, and several other sources—a broad-based build rather than a team lift.
King & Spalding — February 2026: 8 attorneys joined, 7 of whom came directly from Winston & Strawn—another highly concentrated lateral team acquisition in a single month.
White & Case — January 2026: 6 attorneys joined, all from A&O Shearman—a firm-to-firm move reflecting A&O Shearman's ongoing post-merger restructuring and its effect on IP talent retention.
Kirkland & Ellis — September & October 2025: Two consecutive group moves totaling 11 attorneys, most arriving from federal courts—demonstrating Kirkland's deliberate strategy of recruiting clerks from the Federal Circuit and district courts directly into its IP litigation practice.
YHE Law — October 2025: 5 attorneys joined, all from DLA Piper—a boutique absorbing a team from a full-service platform.
Who Got a New Title
589 of 1,040 IP attorneys (56.6%) changed titles with their move. Upward movement to counsel was the second most common transition overall, reflecting IP's relatively senior candidate pool—counsel-level movement is proportionally higher in IP than in any other practice area in this dataset. The Associate → Counsel transition at 76 is nearly double the rate seen in banking or real estate relative to dataset size.
Most Common Title Transitions
Green = promotion · Gold = in-house or cross-title shift · Red = title reduction (often reflects firm titling conventions, not a change in seniority)
In-House, Judicial & Government
234 IP attorneys moved to non-law-firm positions during the tracked period—the highest non-firm exit rate relative to dataset size of any practice area. At 22.5% of all tracked moves, the IP in-house pull is a defining market feature. Technology companies, pharmaceutical firms, and AI platforms are drawing IP talent out of private practice at a pace that creates genuine supply constraints for law firms trying to retain and recruit in this space.
Anthropic and OpenAI each appear in the in-house destination data with multiple IP hires—Anthropic with 4 and OpenAI with 2, alongside Sierra (2) and AMD (2). This is the clearest indication in the dataset that AI companies are building dedicated IP legal teams. For IP practitioners with patent prosecution, technology transactions, or trade secret backgrounds, the AI sector now represents a distinct and active destination category.
Top In-House Destinations
The combination of Big Tech (Apple, Amazon, AMD), pharma (AbbVie, Edwards Lifesciences), and AI platforms (Anthropic, OpenAI, Sierra) in the in-house destination list is unique to IP among all practice areas tracked. No other practice area sends attorneys to this range of industry employers at this rate.
When Attorneys Move
The class of 2023 led all movement, followed by 2022 and 2021. IP shows stronger movement from more senior cohorts than most other practice areas—classes 2016 through 2019 each produced 42–91 moves, reflecting the counsel-heavy nature of IP practice and the longer career arc of attorneys who develop deep technical specializations that remain highly portable at the 6–10 year mark.
Classes 2019–2021 together account for 302 moves—almost 29% of all IP lateral activity—a higher share from this mid-career window than in any other practice area tracked. IP attorneys in their 5–8 year range carry technical expertise, prosecution history, or litigation track records that are both highly specific and highly transferable, making them consistently active candidates well past the typical peak mobility window.
What Practitioners Work On—and What They Pick Up
IP litigation dominates the specialty data at arrival firms, followed by trademark, patent litigation, and patent prosecution. The post-move data reveals where firms are building: trademark is the fastest-growing newly acquired specialty, with 114 attorneys adding it after their move. Trade secrets, ITC, and data privacy are also growing post-move, consistent with the technology sector's expanding IP enforcement agenda.
Top Specialties at Arrival Firms
New Specialties Picked Up After Move
Trademark growing as the fastest newly acquired specialty reflects the explosion of brand enforcement work driven by e-commerce counterfeiting, social media disputes, and global brand expansion programs. Attorneys who arrive at a new firm with a litigation or prosecution background and then add trademark to their profile are responding directly to where client demand is concentrating. Data privacy as a newly gained IP specialty signals the increasing overlap between IP counsel and privacy work, particularly in the tech sector where companies face both infringement and data regulation exposure simultaneously.
Where People Moved From and To
IP has the most distinctive geographic distribution of any practice area tracked. Washington DC leads departures—driven by the Federal Circuit, USPTO, and the DOJ IP division—while California leads total volume at 228 moves, reflecting Silicon Valley and San Diego's concentration of patent-intensive technology and life sciences companies. New York, Chicago, and Boston round out the major markets, each with specialized IP demand tied to financial services, media, and biotech respectively.
Top Departure Cities
Top Arrival Cities
New York is a net receiver of IP talent—167 arrivals versus 146 departures—consistent with the continued growth of IP litigation and trademark practices at major New York-based Am Law platforms. San Francisco gained ground relative to its departure volume, driven by tech company in-house hiring and the expansion of Silicon Valley-focused IP boutiques. Virginia registered 20 arrivals versus 9 departures in the location data, reflecting the growth of IP practices in the Northern Virginia corridor adjacent to USPTO headquarters in Alexandria.
When the Market Moved
Q3 2025 was the peak quarter with 304 moves, closely followed by Q1 2026 at 282. The IP market does not follow the strict Q1 seasonality seen in corporate and banking—Q3 activity is elevated by the Federal Circuit clerkship cycle and by technology companies' tendency to accelerate in-house hiring during the second and third quarters when product roadmaps are being set.
Counsel: 10
Associates: 108
Other: 12
Counsel: 18
Associates: 267
Other: 16
Counsel: 14
Associates: 222
Other: 16
Counsel: 14
Associates: 244
Other: 20
Counsel: 4
Associates: 56
Other: 4
Counsel-level movement held steady at 14–18 per full quarter—the highest counsel-to-total ratio of any practice area tracked. IP is a counsel-intensive market, and the consistent quarterly counsel activity reflects both firms actively recruiting experienced practitioners and candidates choosing their timing based on career progression rather than calendar cycles.
Who Hired Most
The IP hiring landscape is notably different from other practice areas—IP boutiques and specialist firms appear alongside full-service Am Law platforms, and the Federal Circuit itself appears in the data as an employer receiving 14 attorneys (attorneys moving to judicial positions). Orrick leads private firm hiring, followed closely by Greenberg Traurig and Kirkland, with a strong second tier of IP-specialist and technology-focused platforms.
Who Hired Most
Finnegan Henderson—an IP-only boutique—appearing in the top hiring firms list alongside full-service Am Law platforms reflects the IP market's tolerance for specialist firm moves that simply do not exist in corporate or banking. IP practitioners regularly move between boutiques and generalist firms based on practice mix and client access, creating a hiring pool that is broader and more diverse than the firm rankings in other practice areas suggest.
IP Open Positions
94 active IP associate openings are currently in the market—the smallest open position count of any practice area tracked, reflecting IP's specialized nature and the precision required in matching technical backgrounds to firm needs. Demand is split across two distinct candidate types: patent prosecution candidates with technical degrees, and patent litigation candidates with federal court or ITC experience.
Top Firms Hiring IP Associates
Top Cities for IP Openings
IP Specialties in Active Demand
Patent prosecution and patent litigation are effectively tied in open position count, confirming that both prosecution and litigation candidates are in active demand simultaneously. The prominence of technology transactions and licensing in open roles—17 combined positions—reflects firms building out their transactional IP capacity alongside the more traditional contentious practices. Fenwick & West, Wilson Sonsini, and WilmerHale appearing in the open positions list signals that the technology-focused Am Law and near-Am Law platforms are actively hiring, not just the general market. For IP candidates with technical degrees and prosecution backgrounds, the current open position landscape is the most active in several years.
What the Movement Tells Us
The IP lateral market is being reshaped by two forces operating simultaneously: the AI industry's rapid build-out of in-house IP legal teams, and a wave of firm-to-firm team lifts that are redistributing specialized talent across the Am Law landscape. Both are creating supply constraints that will likely intensify through the remainder of 2026.
The AI in-house pull is the most significant new dynamic in the IP market. Anthropic, OpenAI, and Sierra appearing as in-house destinations—alongside Apple, Amazon, AbbVie, and AMD—represents a category of employer that simply did not exist as a major IP talent destination five years ago. These companies are building dedicated IP functions, not just adding headcount. Attorneys who move to these platforms tend to be mid-career practitioners with patent prosecution or technology transactions backgrounds who see an opportunity to build something rather than manage existing dockets. Law firms competing for this talent will find that compensation is only part of the conversation.
The three major team lifts—Sheppard Mullin pulling the Ropes & Gray group, King & Spalding absorbing most of Winston & Strawn's team, and White & Case bringing in the A&O Shearman group—reflect a market dynamic where firms are competing for entire practice capabilities, not just individual headcount. When a firm loses a team like this, the damage is compounded: client relationships, institutional knowledge, and the recruiting credibility that comes from having a known group all leave simultaneously. The firms on the receiving end are making calculated bets that the team's existing relationships and reputation will generate returns that justify the investment.
Washington DC leading departures at 159—more than New York—is a geographic pattern unique to IP. The Federal Circuit, USPTO examining corps, and the DOJ IP enforcement division all serve as talent pipelines into private practice. Attorneys who spent time clerking at the Federal Circuit, examining patents at the USPTO, or litigating at DOJ carry credentials that are highly valued at both boutiques and Am Law platforms. The DC market's departure-heavy pattern in this data is not a sign of weakness—it is a function of the government's role as a training ground for specialized IP practitioners who then enter private practice.
Trademark growing as the fastest newly acquired specialty post-move is a market signal worth acting on now. Brand enforcement work has expanded dramatically with e-commerce platform proliferation, social media IP disputes, and global brand programs. Firms that historically focused on patent work are adding trademark capacity, and candidates who can credibly expand into trademark are significantly broadening their marketability. The same is true for data privacy—as IP and privacy work converge in the technology sector, attorneys who carry both credentials are increasingly competitive for roles that a pure IP practitioner would not previously have considered.
With 94 open positions against a backdrop of high in-house absorption and active team lifts concentrating talent at specific firms, the IP lateral market is tighter from a supply standpoint than the open position count alone suggests. Firms looking to hire IP associates in the 2–5 year range should expect competition from both peer law firms and technology company in-house teams. Candidates with Federal Circuit clerkships, USPTO prosecution backgrounds, or ITC experience are in the shortest supply relative to demand and will have the most leverage in any negotiation.