To succeed in any industry, a certain amount of foresight and planning is key. For patent attorneys, identifying and taking action on high-cost prosecution can lessen the usual timeline and save money in the long term.

Patent prosecution is expensive and complex. And often, each individual practitioner has their own unique approach to reach that all-important NOA. But inconsistent practices and reliance solely on past experience can lead to inflated costs.

Procrastination. We all do it. In-house counsel do it, OCs do it, and USPTO examiners do it. In fact, some examiners procrastinate a lot.

Contemplating an interview at the USPTO? Our analysis found that nearly 95% of examiners are more likely to allow an application when an interview is part of the prosecution.

We’re all familiar with Newton’s third law of physics: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Well, at the USPTO, every office action means additional work for the prosecuting attorney, and thus, additional costs.

In an update to our 2016, 2017, and 2018 lists of most difficult examiners at the USPTO, we have identified the 10 patent examiners (excluding SPEs) with the most skeptical eye toward the patent applications that cross their desks.

United Technologies, an American multinational conglomerate, recently agreed to combine its aerospace business with military contractor Raytheon, creating a new manufacturing giant in the aerospace and defense sectors. Under the new name of Raytheon Technologies, the merged company would have about $74 billion in expected sales for 2019. 

Sprint and T-Mobile recently announced that they had reached a deal to merge, promising to “be a force for positive change in the U.S. wireless, video, and broadband industries.” Combining the country’s third and fourth largest mobile service providers would be one of the most significant consolidations in the American wireless market in years.

We’ve all been there. Prosecution is taking longer than expected. You’re facing one rejection after another. And your client is starting to question whether this patent is worth pursuing.

This precarious position is where Jonathan Miller of Nicholson De Vos Webster & Elliott LLP found himself during a recent prosecution.

Thanks to Juristat patent analytics, practitioners can now leverage data to make strategic decisions throughout the patent prosecution process.

Watch our latest video to learn how firms and in-house teams can shape strategy with big data during all parts of the prosecution process.