James Cosgrove
Recent Posts
Comment
Share
- Tweet
View Post →
January 17, 2018
An Overview of Patent Prosecution Trends at the USPTO Since the Year 2000 Since the year 2000, there have been major shifts in law, policy, and the technological landscape that have had profound impacts on patent prosecution practice at the USPTO. Although we often focus our analytics on small corners of the USPTO, such as individual industries, art unit groups, and practice entities, we...
December 29, 2017
Over the past year, we have published articles covering a wide range of topics, from handling Alice rejections to a study of the ATF industries to the Juristat Top 100. In each of them, we have tried to lift the curtain on the inner workings of the USPTO and various industry players in order to give you, our readers, a more informed outlook on the practice of patent prosecution. Of course,...
One of the biggest questions every client wants to know is “how long will patent prosecution take?” A corollary to that question is “how much will it cost?” The most honest answer is that every prosecution is different and each application involves its own unique set of circumstances. However, one thing is certain--every office action and response thereto extends an application’s prosecution...
Share
October 26, 2017
In July of 2016, we published an article titled “The Most Difficult Examiners at the USPTO,” in which we identified the top 10 patent examiners across all art units whose allowance rates were the lowest. For most patent prosecutors, their examiner’s allowance rate is the clearest indicator of the overall difficulty of prosecuting a patent with that examiner, since a low allowance rate means that...
October 20, 2017
ELIGIBILITY & METHODOLOGY Much like the Juristat Top 100, this list is unique in that it considers both volume and performance. Our ranking is based on four key metrics, as measured from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. These metrics are:
October 04, 2017
In the three-plus years since Alice was decided, we’ve seen the case take quite a toll on the viability of patent applications in the software, e-commerce, and business methods art units. In these technologies, allowance rates have plunged, abandonments have skyrocketed, and a general sense of pessimism has pervaded the industry. However, the effects of Alice, while significant for certain tech...
September 19, 2017
The AFCP 2.0 program was established in 2012 to provide applicants with an alternative to RCEs. The purpose of the program is threefold:
September 06, 2017
As precursors to the more wide-ranging Alice decision and the USPTO guidance that came after it, the impacts of the Mayo and Myriad decisions have gotten somewhat lost in the scuffle of all of the attention paid to § 101 rejections in the software and business methods technology sectors. While Mayo and Myriad were limited to patent applications touching on laws of nature, these two cases...
August 14, 2017
Ever since Mayo was decided in 2012, the percentage of § 101 rejections on biotech, pharma, and life sciences applications has been on the rise, from 4.9% before Mayo to 8.6% after Myriad to 15.7% after Alice. A total of about 37% of all § 101 rejections in Technology Center 1600, which handles the bulk of these types of applications, now cite either Mayo or Myriad. This is bad news for...
August 14, 2017
On August 10, 2017, we presented a webinar titled "Biotech, Pharma, & Life Sciences at the USPTO" where we examined the state of patent prosecution in Technology Center 1600. If you have not seen that presentation, you can view it below.
/Img/download.png)