Veil Global Technologies, formerly known as Advocado, has hauled Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP into Cook County court, accusing the firm of bungling a crucial U.S. patent application and blowing the company’s shot at lucrative licensing deals and market exclusivity. The lawsuit says Norton Rose missed a required U.S. Patent and Trademark Office fee, which led to the application being withdrawn, then kept working to revive the filing while billing Veil for the effort. The company is seeking at least $100 million and has also named a former Norton Rose associate as a defendant, framing the fight as both legal malpractice and breach of contract.
According to Reuters, the complaint, filed as Veil Global Technologies Inc. v. Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, No. 2026L004619 in the Circuit Court of Cook County, says Norton Rose was hired in 2022 to prosecute a U.S. patent application. The filing names associate Alexander Katsulis along with the firm and asks the court for at least $100 million in damages.
Alleged Mishandling And Lost Licensing
Bloomberg Law reports that Veil alleges Norton Rose failed to pay a required PTO fee in 2022, after which the office withdrew the application. The complaint says the firm tried several times between 2022 and 2025 to revive the filing but did not tell the client about the problem until 2024. Those alleged lapses, Veil claims, derailed licensing negotiations and wiped out exclusive market rights at a make-or-break moment for the business. The suit links the prosecution issues directly to missed deals and other lost opportunities and seeks compensation for those claimed harms.
Norton Rose’s Response And The Legal Teams
Norton Rose has publicly pushed back on the allegations and said it "intends to vigorously defend the case in court, where the facts and law matter," according to Reuters. On the other side, Veil is represented in the Cook County action by Glenn Seiden and Brooke Stevens of Seiden Law Group and Jaime Siegel of Cerebral Law, the complaint states.
Why This Matters For Startups And IP Holders
When a patent-prosecution mistake knocks out an application, a startup’s ability to cash in on its technology can evaporate overnight. A withdrawn filing can stall or kill licensing talks and clear the way for rivals to scoop up market share. Norton Rose has been growing its U.S. intellectual property practice and highlights its patent-litigation rankings and recent lateral hires on its own site, which underlines how commercially sensitive this kind of prosecution work is when it goes sideways for a client.
Legal Implications
The complaint accuses Norton Rose of legal malpractice and breach of contract, which means Veil will have to prove not only that the firm fell short of its duties, but that those alleged failures directly caused measurable business losses. Bloomberg Law has noted that malpractice suits tied to failed patent prosecutions often rise or fall on expert testimony about the value of lost licensing prospects and causation, a demanding evidentiary task for plaintiffs.
For now, the case is pending in the Circuit Court of Cook County, and the initial filing does not list a trial date. The road ahead is likely to feature heavy discovery over billing records, patent-prosecution files and dueling expert damages reports as both sides dig in.
