Mexican President sends a proposed IP reform to the Senate, including sweeping changes and innovations.

On September 15, 2025, Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum submitted to the Mexican Senate a sweeping initiative bill to reform Mexico’s Federal Law for the Protection of Industrial Property (LFPPI). While still an initiative, the proposal is notable for its timing: it arrives just as discussions intensify around a potential renegotiation of the USMCA (T-MEC) and amid ongoing criticism from the USTR, which has flagged over 50 non-tariff barriers in Mexico, several relating to intellectual property.

The reform seeks to modernize Mexico’s IP regime with provisions on provisional patents, pharmaceutical patent term adjustments, expedited opposition, administrative silence, ambush marketing, and the use of artificial intelligence in IP infringement, among others.

 

Key Highlights of the Initiative

Provisional Patent Applications – Aimed at supporting entrepreneurs and SMEs, this mechanism would allow inventors to secure early filing protection with simplified requirements and lower costs.

Pharmaceutical Patent Term Adjustment –The initiative introduces a pharmaceutical patent term adjustment/extension mechanism, to compensate patent owners for regulatory delays in obtaining sanitary/marketing approval.

Expedited Opposition – Opposition periods for geographical indications and appellations of origin would be reduced to one month to accelerate resolution of applications.

Administrative Silence (Afirmativa Ficta) – If IMPI (Mexican PTO) fails to respond within statutory deadlines, applicants may be granted favorable resolutions by default in certain cases.

Ambush Marketing – For the first time, ambush marketing would be expressly regulated as a form of unfair competition subject to sanctions.

Artificial Intelligence Misuse – The initiative proposes that the use of AI tools to replicate trademarks, falsify patents, or misappropriate trade secrets be expressly sanctionable under the LFPPI as infringement.

Public Interest Compulsory Licenses – Expanded powers to the Ministry of Health to set conditions—including royalties—when declaring public utility licenses, particularly in pharmaceuticals.

Priority Rights and Restoration – The reform explicitly proposes the restoration of priority rights and the re-establishment of rights for patents, utility models, and industrial designs. The initiative aligns Mexico with the PCT, allowing restoration when the delay was unintentional or despite due care.

Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) – The reform introduces adjustments to patent procedures, including early publication of applications at the applicant’s request, to accelerate substantive examination.

 

Potential Benefits

• Modernization of procedures and alignment with select international best practices (EUIPO-style compliance obligations, provisional applications inspired by U.S. practice).
• Faster decision-making by IMPI, creating more predictability for applicants and investors.
• Recognition of emerging risks from AI and ambush marketing, positioning Mexico as one of the first Latin American jurisdictions to legislate in these areas.

 

Key Concerns & Criticism

Cosmetic vs. Structural Reform: Many changes remain procedural or symbolic, without addressing deeper enforcement and resource challenges at IMPI.

Afirmativa Ficta Risks: Granting rights by default without substantive examination could undermine Mexico’s credibility internationally and potentially conflict with USMCA/TRIPS obligations.

Shorter Opposition Windows: A one-month period may be insufficient for stakeholders to gather evidence and defend rights, weakening third-party protections.

Compulsory Licenses: Expanded ministerial discretion could deter pharmaceutical and biotech investment, especially in a nearshoring context.

AI Regulation: While forward-looking, the provisions are broad and undefined, lacking concrete mechanisms for attribution and enforcement.

 

Key Takeaways for IP Owners in Mexico

Monitor the Legislative Process: This is only an initiative—significant amendments may occur in the Senate’s commissions, which would then turn the review to the Mexican House of Representatives for further review and final determinations. Recent history has shown that considering the majority held in both chambers by the President’s MORENA party, it is foreseeable that this initiative could become reality soon in a rather unmodified form.

Prepare for Procedural Changes: Companies should anticipate shorter opposition periods and stricter deadlines.

Assess Risk Exposure: Particularly in industries vulnerable to compulsory licenses or where AI may be misused.

Engage in Advocacy: Industry associations and chambers should push for balanced rules that protect rights without stifling investment.

Global Benchmarking: Mexico’s approach is evolving—multinationals should align compliance and enforcement strategies with both U.S./EU standards and Mexico’s unique framework.

 

At FisherBroyles, we are closely tracking this development and its potential implications for our clients. We stand ready to assist IP owners, general counsel, and innovators in navigating the shifting Mexican and Latin American IP landscape.

 

For additional information, please contact any of the following:

Sergio Legorreta at [email protected],  Jair Bravo at [email protected], with any questions or more specific situations.

 

FisherBroyles is an international law firm practicing in a number of jurisdictions both in the United States and overseas through affiliated legal entities and branch offices of those entities.  Legal services in Mexico are provided through Bravo Gutierrez & Münch, S.C., a member of FisherBroyles (the “Contracting Member”), with offices located in Mexico City, at Parque Lincoln, 5th Floor, Aristoteles 77, Polanco, Mexico City, Ciudad de Mexico 11560 and in Monterrey, at Blvd. Antonio L. Rodriguez 3000-5to piso Interior, 501 Torre Albia, Col. Santa Maria 64650 Monterrey, N.L.

The FisherBroyles Members engage in coordinated international legal practice and may share certain support services but are separate legal entities, each of which is solely responsible for its own work and is not responsible for the work of any other FisherBroyles Member.  Each FisherBroyles Member is subject to the laws and regulations of the particular jurisdiction or jurisdictions in which it operates. Full details of the legal and regulatory status of each FisherBroyles Member are available on the FisherBroyles website.

The use of the name FisherBroyles is for description purposes only and does not imply that the Member Firms are in a partnership or are part of an LLP.  The use of the word “partner” on any Member Firm’s website or in any other Member Firm materials refers to a partner or member of a FisherBroyles Member or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications.  You agree that your relationship is with the Contracting Member and not with another FisherBroyles Member unless otherwise confirmed in writing to you. You also agree that your relationship is not with any individual who is a member, employee, or consultant (including anyone we call a partner) of the Contracting Firm Member, who will therefore assume, to the extent permitted by law, no personal liability to you.  Absent the explicit agreement and consent of both entities involved, no FisherBroyles Member is responsible for the acts or omissions of, nor has any authority to obligate or otherwise bind, any other FisherBroyles Member.