Continuing our study of firms that perform above average in several metrics in every technology center at the USPTO, we now turn our attention to the firms that receive the fewest office actions to allowance in TC 1700. As we have stated before, we simply report the facts. A low number of office actions could mean that a firm did not fight for as much claim scope as they could have, or it could mean that the firm was precise and targeted when writing their claims. Either way, fewer office actions generally indicates a more efficient and cheaper prosecution, which is something both firms and their clients can find merit in.
Below, we’ve ranked the ten firms that receive the fewest office actions to allowance in TC 1700. To be eligible for inclusion, the firms must have had at least 500 disposed applications in the ten-year period between 2006 and 2015.
The average number of office actions to allowance in TC 1700 is 2.2.
10. Collard & Roe (2.05)
9. Hamre Schuman Mueller & Larson (2.04)
8. Brooks Kushman (1.96)
7/6. Hauptman Ham / Bacon & Thomas (TIE 1.95)
5. Rabin & Berdo (1.83)
4. JC IP Group (1.75)
3. Muncy Geissler Olds & Lowe (1.69)
2. Altis Law Group (1.63)
1. Rosenberg Klein & Lee (1.38)