Is Lack of Diversity a Bigger Problem for IP In-House Lawyers?
Nearly 60% of the participants in a new survey of IP corporate counsel reported that they have been discriminated against for being a woman, ethnic minority and/or LGBTQ.
July 30, 2019 at 01:19 PM
4 minute read
Updated with additional info on the survey, and comments from Jean Lee, president and CEO of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association.
A new global survey of in-house counsel who specialize in intellectual property matters paints a bleak picture of limited diversity and widespread discrimination in their professional world.
Nearly 60% of the participants reported they have been discriminated against for being a woman, ethnic minority and/or LGBTQ, according to a report released Tuesday from Managing Intellectual Property magazine. The London-based publication's managing editor declined to disclose how many in-house lawyers participated in the online survey, which was posted July 5.
Jean Lee, president and CEO of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association, said she was not surprised by the report's finding on the prevalence of discrimination. Her group was involved in a racial and gender bias survey that was released last year and made comparable findings. The study included responses from more than 2,800 in-house and private lawyers.
The report from Managing IP features anonymous comments from several global in-house IP lawyers, including a U.K.-based corporate counsel for a credit card company who reportedly said her legal team had several women in senior roles—but noted that men were being hired at higher pay grades and promoted twice as quickly as women.
An associate general counsel for a U.S.-based life sciences company added, “I was specifically not given responsibility for a project because I was a woman with young children.”
And a senior patent attorney for a German pharmaceutical company reported she believed she'd lost job opportunities because her resume lists leadership experience for a LGBTQ employee network.
“What is clear from the survey results is that a lack of diversity remains and many respondents have experienced discrimination because of their background,” the report states.
On a more encouraging, perhaps contradictory, note, 85% of the in-house lawyers in the study said their companies have diversity and inclusion initiatives. The initiatives focused most commonly on women, LGBTQ and mental health or wellness issues. Nearly a quarter of the participants said they'd like to see more initiatives focused on parenting issues and 22% wanted a greater focus on ethnic minorities.
The respondents were split down the middle when asked whether the IP realm has a greater lack of diversity when compared to other legal practice areas.
The group vice president of a U.S.-based international hotel company reportedly observed the trademark section of the IP bar seems more diverse than the patent side. An associate GC for a U.S.-based life sciences company echoed the assertion, saying the patent practice “is a white dominated specialty,” apparently due to the underlying requirement for degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, according to the study.
“I've heard that a lot,” Lee said. “This is anecdotal, but to be a patent lawyer you have to take a USPTO patent exam and you must have a bachelor's degree in science or engineering. This is the whole STEM that women, and especially underrepresented minorities, were not encouraged to take in high school.”
In China, IP counsel for foreign companies reported they face a cultural glass ceiling because “there is a sentiment that those in senior management roles are always from the company's country of origin, rather than China.”
The China-based IP manager of a Japanese company noted she has hit a dead end with her position and doesn't expect to be promoted even though she oversees issues throughout Asia and handles as much work as her colleagues at higher levels within the firm.
A Chinese IP counsel for a U.S.-based conglomerate expressed similar concerns, saying he'd “already reached the top IP role for the company in China but there is no further progression to a more global role.”
Read More:
Mayer Brown, eBay Collaborate to Foster Diversity With Law School Summer Program
Report: Half of World's Largest Companies Fail Pay Equality Test
Study Shows 'Disheartening' Lack of Diversity at Legal Departments, Law Firms
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAd Agency Legal Chief Scores $12M Golden Parachute in $13B Sale to Rival
3 minute readFTC Sues PepsiCo for Alleged Price Break to Big-Box Retailer, Incurs Holyoak's Wrath
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Plaintiff Argues Jury's $22M Punitive Damages Finding Undermines J&J's Talc Trial Win
- 2Bannon's Fraud Trial Delayed One Week as New, 'More Aggressive,' Defense Attorneys Get Ready
- 3'AI-Generated' Case References? This African Law Firm Is Under Investigation
- 4John Deere Annual Meeting Offers Peek Into DEI Strife That Looms for Companies Nationwide
- 5Why Associates in This Growing Legal Market Are Leaving Their Firms
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250