A study of published citations revealed that, generally, patent holders only locate a subset of all of their forward citations through a search of the PTOs. Without the right tools, finding valuable forward citations is nearly impossible. Leveraging rejection analysis, abandonment rates, and patent to product mapping, you can assess the value of your patents and identify potential infringements in order to evaluate licensing, divestiture, and litigation strategy.
Citation analysis has been routinely used for several decades to help assess patent quality and determine how patents impact the competition and affect the world at large. As we saw in Part 1, citations can actually occur more frequently against an application before grant than after. As discussed, examiners cite applications far more often than they cite patents due to temporal co-dependency and multiple discovery. These early citations become difficult to uncover.
When it came to developing our latest IP platform, we listened closely to our customers and their desire for a simple, easy-to-use system that provided quicker and deeper insights into their IP management.
Citation analysis helps assess patent quality and determine how patents affect the competition and the world at large. Citations come in two principal forms: 1) Forward and 2) Backward (aka reverse). In reality, forward citations are a derived artifact of reverse citations. A great number of forward citations for a given subject (published application or issued patent) may imply its importance in a given technical space, monetary value, potential for being infringed, or its shared interest by others in the technology space.
The principal objectives for foreign filing are protecting revenue streams and blocking competitors, however, efficiency and affordability also predominate the strategy due to prosecution time and expense implications; blanketing the entire world in patent coverage simply isn’t practical. Ultimately, developing a foreign filing plan requires a thorough analysis of the selected markets, attendant costs, competition’s position, probability of success in obtaining grant, and, most importantly, the value derived from the patents secured. Corporations need an iterative and cost effective approach to remain competitive in their requisite markets.
Patent landscaping enables attorneys to provide more strategic advice to clients regarding asset protection best practices, managing costs, and maintaining a clear view of their market(s). A systematic process makes a significant difference in the ability to prosecute high-quality patents in the proper technology spaces and to advise clients which research and development efforts are worthwhile.
Anaqua has successfully integrated multiple organizations and technologies via partnership, merger and acquisition. Because of this, we are confident that our merger with Lecorpio will be just as successful and the work to align our efforts is already underway.
On World IP Day, we celebrate the innovators who are improving people’s lives across the globe.
In the fields of health and nutrition, energy, engineering, telecommunications, transportation and many other technology sectors, we applaud those individuals and organisations who are making a difference – from developing new ways to enhance our daily lives to finding solutions to the world’s greatest challenges.
Supreme Court rulings can alter the landscape of a market and restructure the way corporations do business. In a 7-1 landslide last week, the Supreme Court struck down the Federal Circuit’s decision permitting laches as a defense to patent infringement cases in SCA Hygiene v. First Quality Baby Products (“SCA Hygiene”). My last article discussed the merits of this case, its potential downstream effect on IP stakeholders, and acknowledged the Court’s ongoing evaluation of numerous Federal Circuit patent cases that are reshaping the way corporations and IP law practices do business.