Since June of 2014, Alice has become one of the most feared names in patent prosecution. Rejections citing Alice have multiplied exponentially since then, and they now account for more than 60% of §101 rejections and more than 8% of all rejections, as of our latest analysis. 

But Alice rejections aren’t necessarily fatal to an application – and we found the firms to prove it. Which firms are the best at overcoming Alice rejections and getting to an NOA? Read on to find out.

The 2018-2019 government shutdown will stand – at least for now – as the longest closure or partial closure of the U.S. federal government in modern history. While the USPTO is not immune from the dangers of a shutdown, it has a unique structure that helps it weather the storm. So well, in fact, that the USPTO has never closed due to a lack of federal appropriations.

The four years since Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) have seen thousands of patents invalidated based on its holdings. In an update to our Alice: Three Years On review of the patent landscape, we look to see where Alice has had the greatest impact within the USPTO.

 

It’s common for patent applications to suffer at least one rejection during prosecution. To overcome rejections, patent professionals will often request an interview with the assigned USPTO examiner. But are some examiners more receptive to interviews than others?

Back in 2016, we looked at the Fastest Growing Patent Law Firms, or as we called them, "The Rainmaker Firms." Now two years later, we want to get a fresh look at which law firms are the fastest growing in terms of patent filings with the USPTO.

Juristat Platform brings the power of custom data sets, robust application monitoring, and competitive intelligence together to help in-house teams improve the quantity and quality of patent applications.

Less than six weeks apart, both Apple and Amazon hit major milestones, reaching $1 trillion in valuation. (Apple on August 2, 2018, and Amazon on September 4, 2018.)

These two tech giants, along with Facebook, Netflix, and Google, are often grouped under the acronym “FAANG,” and are synonymous with rapid growth and innovation. As a group, the five companies command over $3 trillion in market capitalization and hold thousands of patents.

But from a patent prosecution perspective, how similar are they? What does FAANG patent prosecution activity tell us about organizations on their way to (and surpassing the) $1 trillion benchmark?

When we think about the technologies that have changed the face of the world and built the modern era, it is impossible to forget or ignore the role of the automotive industry. The automotive industry and the broader sector that it supports defined more than two generations of economic prosperity and mobility in the United States. The automobile in many ways marked the maturity of the industrial age and has since made an indelible mark on our culture and everyday life.

Overcoming rejections is a regular part of a patent prosecutor’s practice. Broadly speaking, there are three main ways to try and overcome an examiner’s rejection: appeal, request for continuing examination (RCE), and interview with the examiner. We have previously looked at how appeals have affected application allowance since 2000, and look now at interviews and RCEs.

Patent professionals are increasingly using data analytics to streamline the pathway from initial filing to notice of allowance. Platforms like Juristat not only help ground strategic decision making prior to and during prosecution, but can also inform strategic decisions that guide business development for firms and counsel selection for patent assignees.