Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis

Alcácer, Juan; Gittelman, Michelle; Sampat, Bhaven N.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1273016

Cited by 50 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 2001, the front pages of issued patents identify whether references emanate from applicant disclosures or examiner searches. Previous research (Sampat, 2010;Alcacer et al, 2009) shows that examiners account for a surprisingly large share of citations to patents, though the examiner share varies across fields. Cotropia, Lemley, and Sampat (2010) show that the examiner-provided citations are the ones that are most likely to be used in deciding whether to grant a patent.…”

Section: Data and Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Accordingly, most (but not all) patent applicants also disclose patent and nonpatent prior art as part of their patent application. Though there is a duty of disclosure in the United States, there is no affirmative requirement that applicants conduct prior art searches; Sampat (2010) and Alcacer et al (2009) argue that incentives for applicants to do so vary across inventions and industries.…”

Section: The Patent Prosecution Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Issued patents also list each of the prior art references considered during the prosecution process and, since 2001, indications of whether these references came from applicant disclosures or examiner searches (Alcacer & Gittleman, 2006;Sampat, 2010;Alcacer et al, 2009).…”

Section: The Patent Prosecution Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some of this research uses the applicant share of references in a patent as a proxy for how intensely applicants are searching for prior art (Sampat, 2010;Alcacer et al, 2009). In our analyses, for the 6,528 patents resulting from the applications in our sample, we take an analogous approach to assessing examiner search intensity: relating the number of examiner citations to patents and the number of examiner citations to publications to examiner characteristics.…”

Section: Data and Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes

Lemley

Sampat

2009

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this paper, we show that there are important differences across patent examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. We show that more experienced examiners cite less prior art, are more likely to grant patents, and are more likely to grant patents without any rejections. These results suggest that the most important decisions made by the patent office are significantly affected by the happenstance of which examiner gets an application. They also point to human resource policies as potentially important levers, hitherto neglected, in patent system reform.

show abstract

Section: Data and Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: The Patent Prosecution Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Patent Prosecution Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data and Descriptive Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes

Lemley

Sampat

2009

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…software, services (Archibuigi and Pianta 1996). Moreover, patents represent the result of a process externally mediated by patent examiners, and reflect national contexts, which result in different citation patterns (Meyer 2000;Alcacer, Gittelman, and Sampat 2009), while the costs in obtaining granted patents may mean smaller organisations or academic organisations are less active (Hopkins et al 2006). For similar reasons we can expect those from developing countries will be less able to afford large patent portfolios.…”

Section: Quantification: Data Gatheringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Just how difficult can it be counting up R&D funding for emerging technologies (and is tech mining with proxy measures going to be any better)?

Hopkins

Siepel

2013

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision makers considering policy or strategy related to the development of emerging technologies expect high quality data on the support for different technological options in order to track trends and allocate resources. A natural starting point would be R&D funding statistics. This paper explores the limitations of such aggregated data in relation to the substance and quantification of funding for emerging technologies. Using biotechnology as an illustrative case, we test the utility of a novel taxonomy to demonstrate the endemic weaknesses in the availability and quality of data from public and private sources. Using the same taxonomy, we consider the extent to which tech-mining presents an alternative, or potentially complementary, way to determine support for emerging technologies using proxy measures such as patents and scientific publications. We find that using proxy measures provides additional visibility of technological emergence and suggest these are a useful complement to financial data.

show abstract

Patent citation analysis with Google

Kousha

Thelwall

2015

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citations from patents to scientific publications provide useful evidence about the commercial impact of academic research, but automatically searchable databases are needed to exploit this connection for large-scale patent citation evaluations. Google covers multiple different international patent office databases but does not index patent citations or allow automatic searches. In response, this article introduces a semiautomatic indirect method via Bing to extract and filter patent citations from Google to academic papers with an overall precision of 98%. The method was evaluated with 322,192 science and engineering Scopus articles from every second year for the period 1996–2012. Although manual Google Patent searches give more results, especially for articles with many patent citations, the difference is not large enough to be a major problem. Within Biomedical Engineering, Biotechnology, and Pharmacology & Pharmaceutics, 7% to 10% of Scopus articles had at least one patent citation but other fields had far fewer, so patent citation analysis is only relevant for a minority of publications. Low but positive correlations between Google Patent citations and Scopus citations across all fields suggest that traditional citation counts cannot substitute for patent citations when evaluating research

show abstract

Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis

Cited by 50 publications

References 18 publications

Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes

Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes

Just how difficult can it be counting up R&D funding for emerging technologies (and is tech mining with proxy measures going to be any better)?

Patent citation analysis with Google

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About