Analyzing each firm’s allowance rate, number of office actions before allowance, and count of applications filed, these rankings consider both performance and volume of work and provide valuable insight for firms and companies looking to navigate the highly competitive world of patent law.
The full list of winning firms will be available for download later this month. In the meantime, we want to highlight some of the key trends we saw in the data this year.
Here are the key trends from Juristat’s 2024 Top Patent Firms:
This year’s list is the largest ever, at 133 firms. While we’ve steadily been seeing growth year over year (see our last trend report), this year’s growth is most likely due to expanded eligibility criteria.
This year, we changed our eligibility criteria from requiring 100 applications filed in the specific tech center in the 12-month period to filing 50 applications. At the higher filing requirement, we felt the list favored large firms and that many firms with excellent performance metrics were ineligible because they had filed just under 100 applications. Setting the threshold at 50 applications still ensures the firm has extensive experience in that technology center and provides an appropriate-sized dataset to evaluate performance metrics.
Changing the eligibility meant the rankings included more firms and more newcomers than ever before, and there were even some shake-ups for the top spots.
It also means we evaluated more firms than ever before. You know what they say – it’s an honor just to be nominated. The Juristat Top Firms rankings represent the best of the best at the USPTO. And it’s all based on patent analytics – not through a call for participation or a hefty entry fee.
Consider this – whether the firm earned the top spot in the technology center or just barely made the list, there are even more firms that didn’t make the cut at all.
This year’s rankings saw a record-breaking 39 newcomers, the largest influx in the history of our rankings. To put this in perspective, there were 12 new firms in 2022, 23 in 2021, and 28 in 2020. This was most likely due to the expanded eligibility criteria for filing volume.
Of the 39 newcomers to the list this year, here’s how they break down in size:
While most of the new firms are small or medium filers, their inclusion reflects the diversity of patent practices that have met the evolving needs of various assignees and inventors. In fact, one medium firm debuted on the rankings in a #1 spot thanks to exceptional performance metrics.
Nearly 70% of ranked firms are considered large, filing more than 500 applications at the USPTO during the designated date range. Despite lowering the filing requirement threshold, large firms dominate. Medium-sized firms, those that file between 250-500 applications, accounted for 17% of our top firms. Firms that filed less than 250 applications in the given time frame accounted for just 13% of ranked firms.
It is worth noting, though, that the spread of small, medium, and large firms wasn’t divided evenly across all technology centers.
Small firms broke through the most in Tech Center 2600, which handles communications-related technologies, and Tech Center 3700, which handles a diverse range of technologies such as medical instruments, shoes and apparel, machine and hand tools, thermal and combustion technology, and refrigeration. Small firms comprised 14% and 16% of the ranked firms in those technology centers, respectively.
Tech Center 1700, where you’ll find patent applications for chemical and materials engineering, overwhelmingly favored large firms. 94% of ranked firms there are considered large filers at the USPTO.
Patent prosecution can seem like an unpredictable business, but 53 firms, 40% of the ranked firms, have demonstrated consistency year after year and keep making our list.
Consistency continues to be the name of the game, particularly for McCoy Russell and Dentons. Both claimed the top spots in technology centers for the fifth consecutive year, McCoy Russell in Tech Center 3700 and Dentons in Tech Center 1600.
Besides McCoy Russell’s familiar presence in Tech Center 3700 and Dentons’ in Tech Center 1600, our rankings this year see different firms leading the way in other technology centers. While most are major players and familiar names on our list, ranking consistently strong year after year, one of this year's top spots was claimed by new entrant, Gray Ice Higdon.
The firm benefitted from our expanded evaluation criteria, filing slightly less than 100 applications in Tech Center 2600. However, their exceptional allowance rates and low number of office actions before allowance help earn them a top spot. This demonstrates that size isn’t always the best indicator of performance. Being a medium-sized firm, perhaps Gray Ice Higdon may not be equipped to handle the full portfolio of some of the biggest players in Tech Center 2600, but if you have key critical applications you need an allowance for, their proven success can deliver results.
Fish & Richardson and Foley & Lardner’s exceptional allowance rates, office actions to allowance, and filing volumes propelled them to a spot on each of the eight technology centers we analyzed. (If you’re feeling déjà vu, don’t worry. This is the fifth consecutive time that Fish & Richardson has achieved this honor.)
Though neither earned a number one rank in any of the technology centers this year, the firms consistently rank high. And remember—earning any spot on the Juristat Top Firms ranking is a success. These two firms’ ability to consistently deliver across diverse technical fields, from semiconductors to pharmaceuticals, sets them apart from competitors.
Not to be counted out, Kilpatrick Townsend and Knobbe Martens ranked in seven of the eight technology centers. These rankings represent the best in patent prosecution, and the metrics for these firms prove their commitment to well-rounded, consistent practice.
The trends highlighted here offer a glimpse at the ever-evolving (and increasingly competitive!) world of patent prosecution. Whether it was an unexpected debut from Gray Ice Higdon or long-running consistency from Dentons and McCoy Russell, the 133 firms in our rankings earned their spots through exceptional performance—not through a call for participation or a hefty entry fee.
Another trend – patent analytics. Each year, we're seeing more Juristat Analytics customers make the list. Just as we rely on data to objectively rank top firms, modern patent firms (and the corporations that hire them!) rely on Juristat Analytics to make strategic, data-driven decisions. And with data from more than 10 million pending, abandoned, and granted patent applications, Juristat is the most robust patent analytics platform available.