BLOG
Patent analysis and insight
Analysis and insight to bring more predictability, transparency, and equity to your patent prosecution.
BLOG
Analysis and insight to bring more predictability, transparency, and equity to your patent prosecution.
While the calendar year may be winding down, your team is likely busier than ever preparing office action responses. In fact, we’re just on the other side of a major spike in office actions from the USPTO, coinciding with the end of their fiscal year on September 30.
We often use allowance rate as a quick and simple way to quantify success at the USPTO -- and we know law firms use it too. However, that is just one of many indicators in-house counsel can use to evaluate firm performance.
When looking for outside counsel, companies are likely hearing similar pitches from all law firms. Business intelligence can be a powerful differentiator, a tool that helps law firms identify areas of strength and discover new pathways to success. It can lead to more focused marketing efforts and a general uptick in client buy-in.
In 2013, the USPTO enacted the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) 2.0 program as an alternative response to a final rejection. The goal of the program was to increase communication between examiners and applicants and take those applications that are close to allowance across the finish line, without requiring the time and cost inevitably associated with an RCE.
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.
Patent prosecution is complex – we know. If you’re ready for simpler workflows and more predictable outcomes, give us a call.