Patents Used in Patent Office Rejections as Indicators of Value

IF 1.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Christopher A. Cotropia, David L. Schwartz
{"title":"Patents Used in Patent Office Rejections as Indicators of Value","authors":"Christopher A. Cotropia,&nbsp;David L. Schwartz","doi":"10.1111/jels.12404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper introduces a novel approach to measure a patent's economic value by examining whether the patent's disclosure leads to rejection of another pending US patent application. This approach considers the use of the patent by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in office action rejections on the grounds of novelty or obviousness, as well as its citation as an X or Y reference in a European Patent Office (EPO) search report, which provides analogous information. Unlike conventional citation metrics widely employed by economists, the novel metric is arguably more closely tied to private value, as it is centered on the examiner's rejection of another patent application based on the patent in question. As this metric is not directly influenced by potential strategic behavior by patent lawyers or patent applicants, it is more directly tied to private value. This study evaluates how patents used in novelty and obviousness rejections, and comparable EPO information, correspond to common measures of private value—specifically patent renewal, the assertion of a patent in litigation, the number of independent patent claims, and classification in multiple technological subject matters. We examine rejection data over a defined time period for US patents issued from 1999 to 2007 and then link value data to these patents. A similar analysis is also conducted for EPO search reports. Our findings reveal that rejection uses, as well as X and Y EPO search citations, independently exhibit positive correlations with all of these value measurements. Moreover, when information from both the USPTO and EPO concerning a given patent is combined, further insights about that patent's value are obtained. We also find that rejection uses provide unique insights into additional measures of private value such as the patent being listed in the Orange Book or as a Standard Essential Patent. Accordingly, these rejection use metrics provide another independent tool for evaluating a patent's value.</p>","PeriodicalId":47187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","volume":"22 1","pages":"76-89"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jels.12404","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jels.12404","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper introduces a novel approach to measure a patent's economic value by examining whether the patent's disclosure leads to rejection of another pending US patent application. This approach considers the use of the patent by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in office action rejections on the grounds of novelty or obviousness, as well as its citation as an X or Y reference in a European Patent Office (EPO) search report, which provides analogous information. Unlike conventional citation metrics widely employed by economists, the novel metric is arguably more closely tied to private value, as it is centered on the examiner's rejection of another patent application based on the patent in question. As this metric is not directly influenced by potential strategic behavior by patent lawyers or patent applicants, it is more directly tied to private value. This study evaluates how patents used in novelty and obviousness rejections, and comparable EPO information, correspond to common measures of private value—specifically patent renewal, the assertion of a patent in litigation, the number of independent patent claims, and classification in multiple technological subject matters. We examine rejection data over a defined time period for US patents issued from 1999 to 2007 and then link value data to these patents. A similar analysis is also conducted for EPO search reports. Our findings reveal that rejection uses, as well as X and Y EPO search citations, independently exhibit positive correlations with all of these value measurements. Moreover, when information from both the USPTO and EPO concerning a given patent is combined, further insights about that patent's value are obtained. We also find that rejection uses provide unique insights into additional measures of private value such as the patent being listed in the Orange Book or as a Standard Essential Patent. Accordingly, these rejection use metrics provide another independent tool for evaluating a patent's value.

Abstract Image

专利局驳回中作为价值指标的专利
本文介绍了一种新的方法来衡量专利的经济价值,通过检查专利的披露是否导致另一项未决的美国专利申请被拒绝。该方法考虑了美国专利商标局(USPTO)以新颖性或显而易见性为由驳回专利的行为,以及其在欧洲专利局(EPO)检索报告中作为X或Y参考文献的引用,该报告提供了类似的信息。与经济学家广泛使用的传统引用指标不同,这种新指标可以说与私人价值联系更紧密,因为它以审查员拒绝基于该专利的另一项专利申请为中心。由于这一指标不直接受到专利律师或专利申请人的潜在战略行为的影响,它更直接地与私人价值联系在一起。本研究评估了新颖性和显而易见性驳回中使用的专利,以及可比较的EPO信息,如何对应于私人价值的共同衡量标准,特别是专利续展、诉讼中专利的主张、独立专利权利要求的数量,以及多个技术主题的分类。我们研究了1999年至2007年期间美国专利的拒绝数据,然后将价值数据与这些专利联系起来。对EPO检索报告也进行了类似的分析。我们的研究结果表明,拒绝使用,以及X和Y EPO搜索引用,独立地与所有这些价值测量显示正相关。此外,当来自USPTO和EPO的关于给定专利的信息结合在一起时,可以进一步了解该专利的价值。我们还发现,拒绝使用提供了对私有价值的额外衡量的独特见解,例如被列入橙皮书或作为标准必要专利的专利。因此,这些拒绝使用指标为评估专利价值提供了另一种独立的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
11.80%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信