The Rise of Contingent Fee Representation in Patent Litigation

David L. Schwartz
{"title":"The Rise of Contingent Fee Representation in Patent Litigation","authors":"David L. Schwartz","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1990651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is well known that contingent representation is on the rise in patent litigation. But why? And what are the lawyers in the field like? Although scholars have studied contingent litigation in other contexts — such as medical malpractice, personal injury, and products liability litigation — patent litigation has received almost no attention. This gap in the literature is unsettling because patent litigation is different from these other fields of contingent litigation in important and interesting ways. These differences include: patent litigation is much more uncertain; the costs of litigating claims are usually significantly higher; and patents, including their underlying infringement claims, are freely assignable. Absent in most other contingent litigation contexts, these characteristics of patent litigation shed light on the broader topics of litigation and contingency relationships in general.Drawing upon several sources of data, including in-depth interviews with over forty lawyers involved in contingent representation in patent litigation and examination of over forty contingent fee agreements, this Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of the rapid evolution of contingent representation in patent law. The development of contingent representation includes top-tier litigation firms recently transitioning to taking on high value contingent cases, small entrants representing plaintiffs in lower value cases, and numerous general practice firms experimenting with contingent patent litigation. These diverse players each select and litigate cases using varied methods, resulting in different levels of risk and reward. The Article uses the study of these players to discuss how and why attorney-client contingent relationships established in the nascent marketplace of patent contingent litigation differ from other types of contingent litigation, and what patent law can teach about contingent representation in general. It also lays the foundation for future quantitative research comparing the results of contingent and hourly billing representation.","PeriodicalId":80402,"journal":{"name":"Alabama law review","volume":"64 1","pages":"335-388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alabama law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1990651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

Abstract

It is well known that contingent representation is on the rise in patent litigation. But why? And what are the lawyers in the field like? Although scholars have studied contingent litigation in other contexts — such as medical malpractice, personal injury, and products liability litigation — patent litigation has received almost no attention. This gap in the literature is unsettling because patent litigation is different from these other fields of contingent litigation in important and interesting ways. These differences include: patent litigation is much more uncertain; the costs of litigating claims are usually significantly higher; and patents, including their underlying infringement claims, are freely assignable. Absent in most other contingent litigation contexts, these characteristics of patent litigation shed light on the broader topics of litigation and contingency relationships in general.Drawing upon several sources of data, including in-depth interviews with over forty lawyers involved in contingent representation in patent litigation and examination of over forty contingent fee agreements, this Article provides the first comprehensive analysis of the rapid evolution of contingent representation in patent law. The development of contingent representation includes top-tier litigation firms recently transitioning to taking on high value contingent cases, small entrants representing plaintiffs in lower value cases, and numerous general practice firms experimenting with contingent patent litigation. These diverse players each select and litigate cases using varied methods, resulting in different levels of risk and reward. The Article uses the study of these players to discuss how and why attorney-client contingent relationships established in the nascent marketplace of patent contingent litigation differ from other types of contingent litigation, and what patent law can teach about contingent representation in general. It also lays the foundation for future quantitative research comparing the results of contingent and hourly billing representation.
专利诉讼中或有费用代理的兴起
众所周知,在专利诉讼中,或有代表权呈上升趋势。但是为什么呢?这个领域的律师是什么样的?尽管学者们在其他情况下研究了或有诉讼,如医疗事故、人身伤害和产品责任诉讼,但专利诉讼几乎没有受到关注。这种文献上的差距是令人不安的,因为专利诉讼在重要和有趣的方面不同于这些其他领域的或有诉讼。这些差异包括:专利诉讼的不确定性要大得多;提起诉讼的费用通常要高得多;专利,包括其潜在的侵权索赔,是可以自由转让的。在大多数其他或有诉讼背景下,专利诉讼的这些特征揭示了一般诉讼和或有关系的更广泛主题。本文利用多种数据来源,包括对参与专利诉讼或有陈述的40多位律师的深入访谈,以及对40多项或有收费协议的审查,首次全面分析了专利法或有陈述的快速演变。或有诉讼代理的发展包括顶级诉讼公司最近转向承担高价值或有案件,小型进入者在低价值案件中代表原告,以及众多尝试或有专利诉讼的普通执业公司。这些不同的参与者各自使用不同的方法选择和诉讼案件,从而产生不同程度的风险和回报。本文通过对这些参与者的研究,讨论了在新生的专利或有诉讼市场中建立的律师-客户或有关系如何以及为什么不同于其他类型的或有诉讼,以及专利法对或有代表的一般教导。这也为将来的定量研究奠定了基础,比较了有条件计费和小时计费的结果。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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