• Firm
  • Practice Areas
  • Sectors
  • Team
  • International
  • News
August Debouzy
  • Legal notice
  • Training
  • Personal data protection policy
  • Cookies policy

Expertises

  • M&A
  • Private Equity
  • Securities law - Capital markets
  • Restructuring Operations
  • Financing
  • Tax Law
  • Real Estate and Construction
  • IT and Data Protection
  • Patent Law
  • Intellectual Property, Media, and Art Law
  • Competition, Retail and Consumer Law
  • Compliance
  • Dispute Resolution
  • Commercial and International Contracts
  • Employment and Social Security Law
  • Public Law and Public Procurement Law
  • Environmental Law
  • European Law
  • Private Clients
  • Projects (Energy & Infrastructure)

Secteurs

  • Aeronautics & Defense
  • Banking - Finance
  • Cybersecurity
  • Energy
  • Industry - Industrial projects
  • Infrastructure
  • Life sciences & Healthcare
  • Luxury - Retail
  • Media
  • Real estate - Construction
  • Sports
  • Tech & Digital
  • Telecoms

Team

  • Our team
  • Join Us

Actualités

  • News
  • Podcasts
  • Events
  • Highlights
  • Insights

International

  • International
  • Firm
  • Practice Areas
  • Sectors
  • Team
  • International
  • News
August Debouzy
  • Legal notice
  • Training
  • Personal data protection policy
  • Cookies policy
  • News ([[posts.total]])
  • Lawyers ([[lawyers.total]])
  • Events ([[events.total]])
  • Practice Areas ([[knowledges.total]])
  • Challenges ([[challenges.total]])
  • In-Focus ([[zoomons.total]])

Download

  • v card
  • pdf

Contact

  • +33 1 45 61 81 29

Lionel Martin

Partner, European Patent Attorney, UPC reprensentative

Lionel Martin is a partner in August Debouzy’s Patents team. He joined the firm in 2014 as a French and European Patent Attorney, after five years of experience at a renowned IP firm.
Admitted to the Paris Bar in 2016, he has since leveraged his dual scientific and legal background, practicing both as a European Patent Attorney (EPA) and as a lawyer. He is also registered as a UPC representative.
He advises and assists French and international clients with all aspects of patent litigation, including enforcement and defense of their patent rights, before the French courts, the UPC, the EPO, and the French PTO (INPI), in both French and English.
He also passes on his expertise to the next generation by providing academic training at leading engineering schools such as Ponts ParisTech and CentraleSupélec, as well as law schools including Paris-Saclay University (Master 2 LEAD) and Strasbourg University (CEIPI) and universities abroad, including the University of Michigan.
 
Lionel also continues to support his clients in preparing patent applications and handling examination processes before patent offices.
 
A large proportion of his work involves mixed patent litigation cases pending before both the EPO and the French courts or the UPC, requiring a high level of interaction. His scientific background has naturally led him to handle cases in sectors such as telecommunications (including FRAND licensing disputes), energy, medical devices, and the automotive industry, almost systematically involving large corporations and representing international clients on a regular basis.
 
Lionel contributes to the transmission of knowledge through teaching activities at leading engineering schools (Ponts Paristech; CentraleSupélec), law schools (Paris-Saclay University: Master 2 LEAD; Strasbourg University: CEIPI), and universities abroad (University of Michigan).

Practice Area

  • Patent Law
  • Dispute Resolution


Education

  • Paris Bar School, 2015
  • Bar School Admission (CRFPA), University of Paris II Panthéon-Assas, 2013
  • Master’s degree in Private Law, University of Paris II Panthéon-Assas, 2010
  • CEIPI (Patents), University of Robert Schumann, Strasbourg, 2009
  • Engineering Degree, Ecole des Ponts ParisTech (Civil Engineering School), Mechanical Engineering and Materials Science, 2008


Admitted to the Bar

  • Paris, 2016
  • European Patent Bar, 2012
  • Registered on the list of persons qualified in IP, 2012


Languages

French I English I German

CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS FRANCE 2025
Intellectual Property : Patents : Up and Coming

CHAMBERS AND PARTNERS GLOBAL 2025
Intellectual Property : Patents : Up and Coming


LEGAL 500 EMEA 2025
Intellectual property : Patents : Tier 1

Next Generation Partner

BEST LAWYERS 2026
(Recognized in Best Lawyers since 2025)

Intellectual Property Law

MIP - IP STARS 2024
Patent disputes: Tier 1

Rising star (2023)

IAM PATENT 1000 FRANCE 2024
Litigation : Gold (Tier 1/3)
Prosecution : Bronze (Tier 3/3)
Transactions : Recommended

  • AD Article

    Clarity On Knotty Patent Jurisdiction Questions From CJEU

    Despite the emergence of the Unified Patent Court in 2023, with jurisdiction over 18 of the 27 European Union member states for both infringement and validity, the national patent courts in the EU retain a competitive jurisdiction.

  • AD Article

    UPC – The interpretation of patent claims by the UPC

    Claim interpretation is central in patent infringement and revocation litigation. After a year and a half of activity, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has published several decisions clarifying its method of interpreting patent claims.

  • AD Article

    1st decisions on the merits issued by the UPC Central Division (2/2): key findings from the CD Paris decisions of 19 and 29 July

    On 19 July, we published the first part of our study on the assessment of inventive step by the UPC Central Division. On the same day, the Central Division

  • AD Article

    1st decisions on the merits issued by the UPC Central Division (1/2): what does the UPC say about the assessment of inventive step compared to the EPO?

    Since the entry into force of the Unified Patent Court (UPC), one of the burning questions that practitioners have in mind is whether the UPC will apply the problem-solution approach of the European Patent Office (EPO) in its assessment of the inventive step. While it is still too early to draw any conclusions, it would appear from the decisions we have studied that the UPC applies its own standards, drawing inspiration from the EPO's problem-solution approach without duplicating it. We offer here a first analysis of how UPC assessed inventive step up to the recent decisions of the Central Division issued on 16 July (Sanofi v. Amgen and Regeneron v. Amgen ). A second publication will focus on the Central Division's decisions of July 19 (Meril v. Edwards Lifesciences ).

  • AD Article

    UPC already in infringement of article 6 ECHR ?

    Is the UPC appeal court so in its youth that it has not yet learned to count up to 5 (at least without the help of its technically qualified judges) ?

  • AD Article

    EPO anticipates unitary patent with start of transitional measures

    The European Patent Office ("EPO") has activated these two measures opening up the use of the unitary patent for patent applications ready to be granted, i

  • AD Article

    E-filing of French patent applications: French PTO (INPI) shuffle its feet after messing with PLT

    August & Debouzy wins its proceedings for exceeding its power (ultra vires) before the Conseil d'Etat against the decision of the Director of the

  • AD Article

    19th version of the UPC Rules of Procedure: the opt-out becomes more complex with the possibility of its removal

    After the opt-out and the correction of the opt-out, there is now the addition of... the removal of the opt-out. Abstract: The 19th version of the Rules

  • AD Article

    Opposition before the INPI: publication of the first opposition decision

    In our article of 2 March 2022, we reported our impressions on the firsts oral proceedings before the INPI[1] and pointed out that they are very similar to

  • AD Article

    San-Ei v. Nexira on the abuse of the right to sue for infringement: an isolated case or the beginning of a disturbing case law for right holders?

    the abuse of the right to sue for infringement : When it comes to infringement proceedings, it is common for the defendant to counterclaim for abuse of process, and equally common for the defendant to be dismissed. The dismissal of such claims is usually based on the grounds that the plaintiff may be mistaken about the scope of his rights and that the mere bringing of such action is not abusive per se.

  • More
    Publications

  • Biography
  • Skills
  • Distinctions
  • News
August Debouzy
  • Legal notice
  • Training
  • Personal data protection policy
  • Cookies policy