A recent report, prepared by economists at the Perryman Group, confirms what has long been stated to be the case—inter partes review (IPR) has positively impacted the U.S. economy. In 2017, on the five-year anniversary of IPR, I calculated an estimate of the legal savings that IPR had generated from 2012 to 2017. I estimated…
Tag Archive for studies
CCIA Letter to Senate Judiciary IP Subcommittee Members On Questionable Studies
by Josh Landau •
At last week’s Senate Judiciary IP Subcommittee hearing, questioners referenced two studies. The first, on multiple IPR petitions, was conducted by Steve Carlson and Ryan Schultz of Robins Kaplan. The second, on venture capital and § 101, was conducted by Prof. David Taylor of SMU. But, as Twain said in a somewhat more colorful form,…
FTC Hearings #4: Patents, Intellectual Property, and Innovation
by Josh Landau •
This post has been cross-posted to DisCo. Last week, the FTC held the fourth in its set of hearings focusing on “Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century.” The first day focused on a review of the current landscape of intellectual property and competition. The second day featured a variety of panels focusing on…
Additional Studies Show IPR Is Not A Threat To Hatch-Waxman Process
by Josh Landau •
Over a year ago, I took a look at a study of the success rate for inter partes reviews (IPRs) of pharmaceutical patents. That study showed that drug and biologic patents are significantly more likely to be upheld at the PTAB than the average patent. Recently, there’s been a wave of additional studies looking at…
Yet More Evidence That NPEs Are Harmful To Innovation
by Josh Landau •
Profs. Cohen, Gurun, and Kominers first published a paper collecting evidence of the impacts of NPEs on innovation in 2014. Recently, they updated the paper, incorporating additional evidence and research from the past four years. The key takeaways? “NPE litigation has a real negative impact on innovation at targeted firms: firms substantially reduce their innovative…
Further Evidence That Examiners Can Be Incentivized To Improve Patent Quality
by Josh Landau •
Patent Progress has previously covered the research of Profs. Wasserman and Frakes regarding structural incentives at the USPTO that affect examiner behavior. A new paper in the AIPLA Quarterly Journal, written by Eric Blatt and Lian Huang (both former examiners), examines another area in which examiner incentives affect behavior—the Signatory Authority Review Program.
What’s In A Name? At The Patent Office, Possibly More Than You Think
by Josh Landau •
In an ideal world, patent examiners are perfect neutral arbiters. They find the best prior art and always make the right decision as to whether an idea is new and entitled to a patent. In this world, we wouldn’t need inter partes review or validity challenges in court—examiners would get it right the first time.…