Sargent & Krahn
We are only able to display limited information for this firm. We display more complete information for all of the following firms:
In addition to acting for national and international companies, as well as entrepreneurs, Sargent & Krahn’s sizeable, 21-strong team assists with related IP work, such as domain names, IT, advertising, consumer rights, unfair competition and major litigation. The group is also experienced in social media, the internet, and privacy and personal data protection; while it has significant expertise in assisting Chilean wineries and salmon companies with safeguarding their trade marks, patents and IP rights on the international markets. Juan Pablo Egaña’s IP practice covers patents, industrial secrets and technology transfer; Eduardo Lobos ‘provides exceptional advice’; and the wide-ranging workload of Cristian Barros M features patents, industrial designs, utility models, trade marks, domain names, pharmaceutical regulation and unfair competition. The department additionally includes Pablo Cariola, who assists with prosecuting IP infringements in marketplaces, websites and social networks; and Carolina Flisfisch, who heads up the firm’s technology, privacy and media group. In the associate pool, senior Daniela Guerrero, along with Alejandra Varela, Macarena Correa and Sofía Flores are other names to note. In January 2026, former senior associate Gabriel Pensa departed the firm.
Legal 500 Editorial commentary
Testimonials
Collated independently by Legal 500 research team.
- The team's strength lies in its technical expertise combined with customer knowledge, delivering a sophisticated and personalized experience.
- Their willingness to address requests promptly and efficiently is commendable. They are very clear in their explanations and guidance. This is a characteristic of the entire team of lawyers and assistants specializing in this area.
Key clients
- Johnson & Johnson
Work highlights
Assisted Odis with its successful defence of a patent infringement lawsuit where the plaintiff had requested $4m-plus damages.