110+ attorneys working with AI: how Plasseraud IP made adoption a question of judgment
patent attorneys and engineers working with AI
year Plasseraud chose DeepIP
years of patent practice
Executive Summary
Plasseraud IP has protected inventions since 1906. In 2024, the firm chose DeepIP and rolled it out across its patent practice. Nearly three years into that bet, more than 110 of its patent attorneys and engineers work with AI.
The most useful lesson, in the words of Ina Schreiber, Partner, Head of Patent Department and Board Member, is not about speed. It is about where judgment sits in a firm. A survey of attorneys across the firm showed that senior attorneys, not juniors, were the heaviest users of AI.
"Seniority was not resistance. It was the condition for getting value."
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Firm | Plasseraud IP |
| Founded | 1906 |
| Headquarters | Paris, France |
| Patent practice groups | Life sciences, chemistry, IT, mechanics |
| Working with AI | 110+ patent attorneys and engineers |
| DeepIP since | 2024 |
| Primary contact | Ina Schreiber, Partner, Head of Patent Department and Board Member |
The Challenge: an adoption curve that did not behave as expected
A firm does not last 120 years by standing still. Plasseraud was one of the first firms to adopt electronic filing as early as 2004, and moved towards paperless files before 2010. AI was the next shift, and the one that touches the core of patent work most directly: the drafting itself.
When the firm started working with AI in 2024, it expected the usual adoption curve. Younger attorneys, at ease with new tools, would lead. Senior attorneys would follow, cautiously, if at all. And on bespoke matters, time saved is hard to prove.
Working with DeepIP
Plasseraud chose DeepIP in 2024 and rolled it out across its patent practice. The relationship has since moved closer to the work itself: Ina Schreiber joined DeepIP's Product Advisory Board, to bring the questions of chemistry and life sciences practitioners directly to the people building the tool.
Adoption, specialty by specialty
Plasseraud's patent practice is organized in four practice groups: life sciences, chemistry, IT, and mechanics. Adoption was not even across them. For a long time, the chemistry and life sciences teams used AI mainly for prior art summaries, not for drafting, because the tools did not yet handle the specifics of their fields, from Markush structures to biological sequences.
Rather than wait, Plasseraud worked with DeepIP's team on what its chemists needed. Support for sequences, chemical structures and Markush claims is now part of the platform, and the firm's chemistry and life sciences teams are being trained on it.
"Adoption does not follow a firm-wide decision. It follows the moment a tool earns the trust of each specialty, on its own terms."
What changed
Plasseraud does not measure success in hours saved. Every matter is bespoke, and there is no standard, repeatable task to time before and after. The firm looks at other signals: whether attorneys keep using the tools once the novelty has passed, how deeply they use them, and how the same attorney's work evolves over time.
On that measure, the answer is clear: more than 110 patent attorneys and engineers now work with AI. The January 2026 survey added the result that surprised the firm most: senior attorneys were the most frequent users, across the widest range of tasks. An experienced attorney can judge a draft claim or a prior art summary at a glance, use AI as a fast first pass, and correct it quickly.
What's Next: protecting how judgment is built
If senior attorneys get the most out of AI because they can judge its output, a harder question follows: where will the next generation build that judgment? Patent attorneys have always learned by drafting claims from scratch and being corrected over red-penned drafts. Plasseraud is actively testing different approaches to training and supervision, and does not claim to have it all figured out.
"Protecting how it is cultivated in junior attorneys is not just an internal training concern, it is an existential question for the profession."
| Insight | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Judgment drives adoption | Senior attorneys became the heaviest users because they can judge an output at a glance. AI amplifies expertise; it does not replace it. |
| Hours saved is the wrong metric | On bespoke matters, sustained use, depth of use and the evolution of each attorney's work say more than a stopwatch. |
| Trust is earned specialty by specialty | Chemistry and life sciences teams are now being trained on support for Markush structures and sequences, shaped with the firm's own practitioners. |
| Training juniors is the next frontier | Protecting how judgment is built in junior attorneys is, for Plasseraud, a question for the whole profession. |