AI Tools For IP Lawyers – Cost Savings – Real World Examples – Human Oversight – Interview With Arthur Rothrock and Nicholas Sarokhanian – EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal Decision G1/24 Regarding Patent Claims – USPTO Discontinuing Accelerated Examination For Utility Patents – Octoberfest Decision of the European Court of Justice – IP Fridays – Episode 164

I am Rolf Claessen and my co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 164 of our podcast IP Fridays!

Today’s interview guests are Arthur Rothrock and Nicholas Sarokhanian. My co-host Ken Suzan talks with them about AI tools for IP lawyers.

Arthur Rothrock https://www.linkedin.com/in/rothrocka/

Nicholas Sarokhanian https://btlaw.com/en/people/nicholas-sarokhanian

Podcast: The Litigator’s Path – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-litigators-path/id1765423485

Podcast: Minds & Machines – https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/minds-machines-navigating-ai-and-the-law/id1801779390

U.S. Copyright Office, Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence

https://www.copyright.gov/ai

Before we jump into the interview, we have news for you!

The USPTO is discontinuing Accelerated Examination program for utility applications.

The USPTO is currently facing staff-related challenges including a hiring freeze, which seems to just have ended, return-to-office mandates, and potential attrition due to these policies. These issues seem to impact employee morale, potentially increasing the backlog of unexamined patents, and creating uncertainty about the future of the agency.

The USPTO has experienced a significant leadership vacuum following abrupt emails earlier this February encouraging early retirement of all Federal employees, and an unusual level direct outside communication and control of employees from OPM/DOGE.

The first office action pendency for patents increased from 19.9 months in 2024 to 23.4 months in May 2025.

On 19 June the CJEU opened oral argument in the “Oktoberfest” trademark dispute. Munich is defending its EU mark against the EUIPO, and the coming judgment could redefine the protectability of geographic event titles.

On 18 June the EPO’s Enlarged Board in G 1/24 confirmed that claims are the starting point of examination, yet description and drawings must always be consulted for the  interpretation of the claims, bringing EPO practice closer to UPC jurisprudence.

Meanwhile representatives of all 39 EPC member states met the EPO in Reykjavík to discuss IP-backed financing tools aimed at giving research-intensive SMEs better access to capital.

Since 11 June, the EPO has also been offering its “Deep Tech Finder” as an iOS and Android app. The application links patent data with the financial metrics of European start-ups and facilitates cooperation between mid-sized companies, investors, and universities.

In this episode of IP Fridays, co-host Ken Suzan welcomes two distinguished guests to explore one of the most dynamic and fast-moving topics in the legal field: Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools for IP lawyers.

Arthur Rothrock, co-founder and CEO of Legion, and Nicholas Sarokhanian, Chair of the Artificial Intelligence Practice at Barnes & Thornburg LLP, join the podcast to discuss how AI is transforming the way intellectual property lawyers work—today and in the near future.

Meet the Guests

Arthur Rothrock is the founder of Legion, a legal tech startup offering an AI-powered litigation support platform. It helps attorneys draft pleadings, discovery responses, motions, and other legal documents. Arthur is also the host of the Legal Entrepreneur Podcast and brings a strong background in legal innovation.

Nicholas Sarokhanian leads the AI Practice Group at Barnes & Thornburg and is based in Minneapolis. He is a recognized thought leader on generative AI, large language models (LLMs), and the broader legal implications of these technologies. Nick also hosts the Minds and Machines Podcast, where he regularly shares insights into the evolving digital landscape.

---

Key Talking Points from the Interview

1. The Rise of Generative AI in Law
Nick explains how generative AI tools like GPT are already being adopted by major law firms. These tools are not meant to replace attorneys, but rather to augment their work by streamlining drafting tasks, enabling more efficient legal research, and improving turnaround time for clients.

2. From Experimentation to Integration
Arthur emphasizes the importance of integrating AI not just as a novelty, but as a core part of legal workflows. His platform, Legion, allows lawyers to quickly generate work product that can be reviewed, refined, and filed—saving hours of manual work without compromising quality.

3. Use Cases for IP Lawyers
Both speakers explore practical examples for trademark and patent lawyers. These include:

• Drafting cease-and-desist letters
• Preparing office action responses
• Assisting with prior art searches
• Creating internal knowledge databases
• Translating complex legal issues for clients

4. Ethical and Professional Responsibility
A major theme in the conversation is how lawyers can responsibly use AI. Nick cautions against over-reliance and emphasizes the need for human oversight. Accuracy, client confidentiality, and compliance with ethical duties remain critical. Arthur adds that lawyers must be trained to ask the right questions and apply sound judgment when using AI-generated output.

5. The Future of Legal Work
The guests agree that AI will not replace IP lawyers, but IP lawyers using AI will likely outpace those who don’t. As generative tools evolve, attorneys who embrace and understand them will be better equipped to deliver faster, more strategic value to their clients.

6. Tips for Getting Started
Nick suggests that lawyers start small by experimenting with legal-specific AI tools in low-risk scenarios. Arthur recommends being intentional about which parts of the practice to automate and continually reassessing the tool’s value through feedback loops.

---

Final Thoughts

This episode provides a practical, experience-based look at how AI is reshaping the intellectual property profession. Whether you’re a solo practitioner, part of a boutique firm, or in-house counsel at a tech company, this discussion offers insights you can use today.

You can listen to the full episode and access additional resources, including a recording of the webinar and a written summary of the key takeaways, on our website or your favorite podcast platform.

Here is the transcript:

Kenneth Suzan: Our guest today on the IP Fridays podcast are Arthur Rothrock and Nicholas Sarakhanian. And our topic is AI tools for lawyers. Arthur is the co-founder and CEO of Legion, an AI-powered litigation support platform which enables users to draft pleadings, discovery, motions, and other legal documents. Arthur is also the host of the Legal Entrepreneur podcast. He holds a BA from Indiana University of Pennsylvania and a JD from Santa Clara University School of Law. Nick is the chair of the artificial intelligence practice at Barnes and Thornburg LLP and is based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Nick is dedicated to remaining at the forefront of emerging legal issues related to generative AI, large language models or LLMs, and the evolving digital landscape. Nick is also the host of the podcast Minds and Machines. A thought leader in this space, Nick frequently writes and presents on AI-related issues and guides his clients through the labyrinth of opportunities and challenges inherent in today’s transformative technological ecosystem. Nick holds a BA from Virginia Tech and a JD from Baylor University School of Law. Welcome Arthur and Nick to the IP Fridays podcast.

Arthur Rothrock: Thank you for having us. I’m really excited to be here and to do this with Nick.

Nicholas Sarokhanian: Yeah, thank you so much. And what a great intro. You made me sound far more interesting and important than I think I am. So thank you for that. That’s great.

Kenneth Suzan: Excellent. Welcome both to the podcast. We’ll start out with Arthur. Arthur, tell us about your AI litigation support platform known as Legion. How does it work?

Arthur Rothrock: Sure. So Legion uses AI to draft fully formatted pleadings, discovery, and motions in minutes. Eventually, we’ll become a litigation operating system by offering case analytics, automatic deadline tracking, billing, eDiscovery—all that good stuff. But for now, we’re laser-focused on nailing the most tedious and time-consuming drafting parts of litigation. This is all possible because Legion is built from the ground up with AI instead of being an existing platform with AI bolted on. For example, Legion has context awareness of every document that is uploaded, allowing it to suggest relevant drafting tasks. The drafting process uses a mix of advanced models, prompt engineering, and my experience as a litigator. We treat AI like a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.

Kenneth Suzan: Arthur, what jurisdictions does Legion currently apply to?

Arthur Rothrock: Right now, Legion is focused on U.S. federal court litigation, but we’re expanding into state courts and are exploring international applications. Smaller firms and solo practitioners have been the fastest adopters—they’re excited about how this levels the playing field. In-house teams are more cautious but curious.

Kenneth Suzan: What motivated you exactly to create Legion?

Arthur Rothrock: It started from a place of frustration. I saw firsthand how expensive and time-consuming litigation is, especially for people with limited resources. One woman had a clear defamation case but couldn’t afford the $100,000 it would cost to get to trial. That stuck with me. I wanted to build something that could help people like her access justice without going bankrupt. AI can dramatically reduce drafting time and litigation costs.

Kenneth Suzan: Nick, is AI a fad? Or is this something that is here to stay?

Nicholas Sarokhanian: It’s absolutely here to stay. Maybe in 2022 or early 2023, some thought it was a passing trend, but the pace of development since then has made it clear this is permanent. As others have said: the AI we have now is the worst we’ll ever have—it’s only getting better. Yes, it will change workflows and increase demand for elite legal minds who can go beyond what AI can do. But it will also democratize access to legal tools. Those who adapt will benefit most.

Kenneth Suzan: Arthur, how is AI improving efficiency in litigation preparation?

Arthur Rothrock: It speeds up almost everything. Drafting takes a tenth of the time. Reviewing deposition transcripts, finding that obscure case you used years ago—AI handles that efficiently. It all adds up to huge gains in productivity.

Kenneth Suzan: Nick, what are your thoughts about Arthur’s position? Would you use an AI litigation support platform?

Nicholas Sarokhanian: I already do. I’ve been using generative AI since late 2022, personally and professionally. When firm policies and client consent allow, I use it in litigation too. It’s not magical, but it’s incredibly useful. For instance, I recently had a legal AI tool generate a discovery tracker spreadsheet from a PDF with over 80 objections. It did it in a minute. That saved hours of associate or paralegal time. It’s not perfect, but it’s a fantastic head start.

Kenneth Suzan: Now, there are limitations. Arthur, how do AI tools still struggle and require human oversight?

Arthur Rothrock: The big issue is hallucination—AI making things up. Lawyers are getting sanctioned for citing fake cases. Long and complex tasks are still a problem unless broken down. Tools like retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) aren’t foolproof, and success often depends on user skill. AI agents are improving, but they still need supervision. AI can’t yet replace human judgment in seeing the bigger legal picture. For now, and probably for a long time, a lawyer must be in the loop.

Kenneth Suzan: Nick, your thoughts on the hallucination issue?

Nicholas Sarokhanian: It’s inherent in how large language models work—they make predictions based on probability. That means sometimes they get it wrong. Improvements are happening quickly, but hallucinations remain a real issue. My advice to young lawyers: don’t be the cat lawyer. Learn the tools on low-risk tasks, like personal life stuff. Get comfortable before using it in client work. And always double-check the output, especially citations. Even big firms make mistakes. Ethically, lawyers are expected to be competent with technology, so you can’t just ignore it.

Kenneth Suzan: We’re almost out of time. Arthur, can you comment on real-world time and cost savings?

Arthur Rothrock: Sure. A 15-page complaint might take 15 hours to draft, costing $7,500. Legion can do it in a few minutes for $150, plus an hour of review—so $650. Motions to compel, which usually cost $15,000 in attorney time, can be done for under $1,000 with Legion. Even with general AI tools, if you’re savvy, you can cut time by two-thirds. AI is best when you already understand the subject—it’s a great drafting assistant, but shouldn’t be your source of truth.

Kenneth Suzan: Well said. Arthur, Nick—thank you so much for spending time with us today on the IP Fridays podcast. This has been truly fascinating.

Nicholas Sarokhanian: Yeah, thanks for having us.

Kenneth Suzan: Thank you.