Trademark Lawyers in 2026: Who Files and Who Hires

Trademark law firms can be measured in two ways that rarely meet: the matters they put on record and the lawyers they hire. Sartori & Partners data show 11,836 trademark matters on court and trademark-office records over the past 3 years, against 237 trademark lawyers who changed firms in the past 12 months. Set the ten firms with the most filings beside the ten that hired the most trademark lawyers, and only Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton sits on both lists, first on each. The firms that carry the filing volume and the firms building trademark benches are, for the most part, different firms. For a firm that hires, that gap is where both the candidates and the competition sit.

Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton heads the filing list in the 401-700 band of matters and the hiring list in the 6-10 band of lawyers hired. Below it, the two lists part. The next names on the filing list, Greenberg Traurig, Barnes & Thornburg, Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner and Holland & Hart, are not among the ten most active trademark hirers of the past 12 months. The hiring list runs instead through Morrison & Foerster, Clark Hill, Thompson Hine and Womble Bond Dickinson, each in the 3-5 band, and none of them among the ten largest filers.

The longer view narrows the gap without closing it. Over 3 years, Taft Stettinius & Hollister and Greenberg Traurig rank among the ten most active trademark hirers and also sit on the filing list, as does Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton. Firm rankings count individual hires, so a team that arrived together shows in the totals but not in a firm's rank. The practical reading for a hiring partner: the filing list shows which firms appear most often on the trademark record, and the hiring list shows who is competing for trademark lawyers this year. The two are different sets of firms, so a search that watches only the hiring list misses most of the firms with the heaviest filing record.

In the Sartori & Partners records, 99.7% of the trademark matters of the past 3 years are disputes, drawn from court and trademark-office records: oppositions, cancellations and infringement suits rather than transactions. Of the total, 4,707 fall in the last 12 months. These counts measure presence on the record, not revenue. A single opposition and a multi-year infringement trial weigh the same, so the filing list shows which firms appear most often, not which earn the most from brand work.

Consumer brands drive the record. Consumer Goods & Retail accounts for 10.1% of trademark matters and Food, Beverage & Agriculture for 8.3%, ahead of Technology & Software at 5.9%. That is the clue to where volume comes from: portfolios of consumer marks that need constant clearance, watching and enforcement. A firm that wants trademark volume hires the lawyer who already holds those portfolios, because the filings follow the client relationship rather than the size of the firm.

Firms of 1,000+ lawyers took 35.4% of trademark lateral moves in the past 12 months, against 48.6% in intellectual property and 53.6% across the market. The difference lands in the middle. Firms of 400-999 lawyers took 32.1% of trademark moves, 7.9 points above their share of intellectual property hiring, and firms of 150-399 lawyers took 23.2% against 14.6%.

Smaller firms also act as a feeder. Over 3 years, firms under 150 lawyers were the previous employer in 14.7% of trademark moves with a known source, against 11.4% across the market. Yet hiring is concentrated among a short list of buyers: the ten most active hirers took 19.7% of trademark moves, against 15.2% in intellectual property and 12.9% market-wide, spread over 138 hiring firms in all. The rival for a trademark candidate is less often a global firm and more often a national or regional firm with a brand practice it wants to deepen. Pitch the platform, the client base and the support staff, not the size of the letterhead.

San Francisco took 9.3% of trademark lateral moves, an index of 289 against the city's share of all moves. Intellectual property as a whole shows nearly the same pull there, with an index of 292, so the city's weight is a feature of the wider practice rather than of trademarks alone. New York took 15.6% of trademark moves, an index of 106, against 93 for intellectual property. Other cities sit under the publication threshold for 12 months; over 3 years, Los Angeles took 7.2% of trademark moves and Chicago 5.5%.

Trademark lawyers also stay put. Only 15.1% of trademark moves with both cities known involved a change of city, against 20.5% for the whole market. Recruit in the city where the lawyer already practices; a relocation offer will rarely decide the move, and an office without local trademark presence will struggle to import one.

Trademark lateral hiring held flat (-6.1%) year on year, at 246 moves in the latest settled 12 months against 262 the year before. Intellectual property held flat (+7.2%) over the same windows, while the whole market rose 9.0%, to 14,305 moves from 13,128. Partner hiring in trademarks held flat (+3.9%), at 106 moves against 102.

The mix tilts senior. Partners made up 44.3% of trademark moves, against 34.4% in intellectual property and 27.7% market-wide, while associates were 43.5%. Firms also grow their own: 69 trademark lawyers were promoted to partner in the 12 months to May 2026, after a median of 10.0 years in practice. On the data date, 147 trademark openings were live on law-firm career pages. A steady market does not bid candidates up, so a firm with a clear brand platform can take the time to pick its partner rather than react to a rival's offer.

First, look past the hiring list. Sartori & Partners data show the ten largest trademark filers and the ten most active hirers share only Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton. Most firms with heavy trademark filing activity were not among the most active trademark hirers this year, so a search should cover both lists, not only the firms already recruiting. Second, expect your rival for a candidate to be a mid-size firm: firms of 400-999 lawyers took 32.1% of trademark moves. Third, recruit locally. With 15.1% of moves involving a change of city, a San Francisco or New York search should start with lawyers already there. Fourth, budget for a partner with a portfolio: partners were 44.3% of moves, and the portfolio, usually consumer marks, is what makes the hire pay.