Why weak patents? Testing the examiner ignorance hypothesis

There is a widespread impression, reflected in recent legislation, that US Patent Office examiners issue many patents of dubious validity, and are insufficiently informed to distinguish these from other valid applications. We address this issue using related application outcomes at the European Patent Office as indicators for patent weakness. We create a proxy for potentially citable prior art using latent semantic analysis of US patent documents, and use this to construct a measure of examiner search effort. We find that US examiners tend to devote more search effort to weaker patents, implying that they can identify a substantial portion of the weak patents that they issue. Why the patent system fails to make better use of examiners' ability to identify weak patents is a question that merits further investigation.

[1]  Robert P. Merges,et al.  As Many as Six Impossible Patents Before Breakfast: Property Rights for Business Concepts and Patent System Reform , 1999 .

[2]  Alfons Palangkaraya,et al.  Disharmony in international patent office decisions , 2006 .

[3]  Bhaven N. Sampat,et al.  When Do Applicants Search for Prior Art? , 2010, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[4]  Xavier Jaravel,et al.  Who Feeds the Trolls? Patent Trolls and the Patent Examination Process , 2016 .

[5]  Lee Petherbridge.  On Addressing Patent Quality , 2009 .

[6]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Ending Abuse of Patent Continuations , 2003 .

[7]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents , 1998 .

[8]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Pioneering Inventors or Thicket-Builders: Which Firms Use Continuations in Patenting? , 2009, Manag. Sci..

[9]  F. Schuett.  Patent quality and incentives at the patent office , 2013 .

[10]  Michael D. Frakes,et al.  Does Agency Funding Affect Decisionmaking?: An Empirical Assessment of the PTO’s Granting Patterns , 2012 .

[11]  C. Shapiro.  Patent System Reform: Economic Analysis and Critique , 2004 .

[12]  Mark A. Lemley.  Fixing the Patent Office , 2012, Innovation Policy and the Economy.

[13]  Alfons Palangkaraya,et al.  Characteristics of international patent application outcomes , 2007 .

[14]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Is the Patent Office a Rubber Stamp? , 2008 .

[15]  Michael D. Frakes,et al.  The Failed Promise of User Fees: Empirical Evidence from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office , 2014 .

[16]  L. Andrews,et al.  Patents on Human Genes: An Analysis of Scope and Claims , 2005, Science.

[17]  James E. Bessen,et al.  Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk , 2008 .

[18]  Deepak Hegde,et al.  What is the Probability of Receiving a U.S. Patent? , 2015 .

[19]  Michael D. Frakes,et al.  Does the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office Grant Too Many Bad Patents?: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment , 2014 .

[20]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes , 2009 .

[21]  Michael D. Frakes,et al.  Is the Time Allocated to Review Patent Applications Inducing Examiners to Grant Invalid Patents?: Evidence from Micro-Level Application Data , 2014 .

[22]  Sean B. Seymore.  The Presumption of Patentability , 2012 .

[23]  Carl Shapiro,et al.  How Strong Are Weak Patents , 2008 .

[24]  Ronald J. Mann,et al.  A New Look at Patent Quality: Relating Patent Prosecution to Validity , 2010 .

[25]  Clarisa Long.  The PTO and the Market for Influence in Patent Law , 2009 .

[26]  Mark A. Lemley.  Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office , 2001 .

[27]  Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie,et al.  Patent Office Governance and Patent System Quality , 2011 .

[28]  Gaétan de Rassenfosse,et al.  Low-Quality Patents in the Eye of the Beholder: Evidence from Multiple Examiners , 2016, The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization.

[29]  Ronald J. Mann,et al.  A New Look at Patent Quality: Relating Patent Prosecution to Validity , 2012 .

[30]  Joshua Lerner,et al.  Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It , 2011 .

[31]  Jay Pil Choi,et al.  Live and Let Live: A Tale of Weak Patents , 2005 .

[32]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Post-Issue Patent "Quality Control": A Comparative Study of Us Patent Re-Examinations and European Patent Oppositions , 2002 .

[33]  Katharine Rockett,et al.  Innovation Cycles and Learning at the Patent Office: Does the Early Patent Get the Delay? , 2010 .

[34]  Dietmar Harhoff,et al.  Modelling the Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[35]  Mark A. Lemley,et al.  Do Applicant Patent Citations Matter? , 2012 .

[36]  Alfons Palangkaraya,et al.  Misclassification between Patent Offices: Evidence from a Matched Sample of Patent Applications , 2011, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[37]  M. Gittelman,et al.  Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis , 2008 .