Juristat conducted an analysis which reviewed trends in examiner behavior immediately following an interview with the applicant. Specifically, we calculated the percentage of examiner interviews after first rejection that result in NOA with amendment, NOA w/o amendment, rejection, or no decision. What we found is that particular examiners often heavily favor one outcome over another. The data shown in this blog post is the result of analysis across our entire dataset. We do not factor art unit or time periods into our calculations. We only use examiners who are listed on more than 100 applications and who have had at least one application with an examiner interview after first rejection. Therefore, our normalized sample consists of 6556 examiners. From that pool we calculated the following statistics:

By default, patent applications filed in the United States publish eighteen months after their earliest effective filing date. However, under 35 U.S.C 122(b)(2)(B)(i)[1], an applicant may file a non-publication request which, if certain requirements are met, allows for the application to remain unpublished beyond eighteen months, to be published only if and when a patent is granted. If the application is abandoned, then the contents of the application will remain unpublished indefinitely. I know from time to time we have all wondered which firms and in-house counsels are filing all of these secret patent applications. Well, Juristat knows. Below is a graph of the Top 15 filers of non-published patent applications publications that were ultimately granted.

Juristat transforms raw patent application data into actionable analytics allowing you to optimize prosecution and marketing strategies. Our union of artificial intelligence, big data, and an unparalleled understanding of the U.S. patent system provides prosecutors with the expertise to maximize allowances, manage client expectations, and dominate the competition.