Difference between revisions of "Alcacer, Gittelman, and Sampat, 2008"

From Inventing aviation
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "* Juan Alcacer, Michelle Gittelman, and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2008. Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis. Harvard Business School Strategy Unit...")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
* Juan Alcacer, Michelle Gittelman, and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2008. Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis. Harvard Business School Strategy Unit Working Paper No. 09-016, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1273016 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1273016
 
* Juan Alcacer, Michelle Gittelman, and Bhaven N. Sampat. 2008. Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis. Harvard Business School Strategy Unit Working Paper No. 09-016, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1273016 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1273016
  
−
From the abstract: The [[USPTO]] has been reporting [[patent citations]] by applicants and [[examiners]] separately since 2001. "In this paper, we analyze the prior art citations of all patents granted by the USPTO in 2001-2003." In their sample, 63% of citations were added by examiners, and 40% of patents did not have any citations by applicants.  The share of citations added by examiners was highest for "non-US applicants and in electronics, communications, and computer-related fields." Differences between firms (employing the inventors) were large.
+
From the abstract:   "In this paper, we analyze the prior art citations of all patents granted by the USPTO in 2001-2003." In their sample, 63% of citations were added by examiners, and 40% of patents did not have any citations by applicants.  The share of citations added by examiners was highest for "non-US applicants and in electronics, communications, and computer-related fields." Differences between firms (employing the inventors) were large.
 +
* The [[USPTO]] has been reporting [[patent citations]] by applicants and [[examiners]] separately since Jan 2001, when a procedural change occurred.
 +
* Their data has about 500,000 granted patents, which I gather is approximately all the patents granted in 2001-2003. About 11,000 (2%) have no citations and so are excluded from most of the analysis
 +
* Finding (p3): examiners introduced 63% of all patent citations to US patents in the sample
  
 
So this works shows evidence that lots of inventors do not cite, and probably do not know, much of the literature known by examiners.  It's US-specific, but the main principles probably extend.  It helps us think about the difference between what is known, somewhere, and what the inventor per se knows or cares about.  Presumably lots of inventors do not know what is in previous patents, and it would have been even harder to know back in the early aero period.
 
So this works shows evidence that lots of inventors do not cite, and probably do not know, much of the literature known by examiners.  It's US-specific, but the main principles probably extend.  It helps us think about the difference between what is known, somewhere, and what the inventor per se knows or cares about.  Presumably lots of inventors do not know what is in previous patents, and it would have been even harder to know back in the early aero period.

Latest revision as of 22:52, 20 January 2022

From the abstract: "In this paper, we analyze the prior art citations of all patents granted by the USPTO in 2001-2003." In their sample, 63% of citations were added by examiners, and 40% of patents did not have any citations by applicants. The share of citations added by examiners was highest for "non-US applicants and in electronics, communications, and computer-related fields." Differences between firms (employing the inventors) were large.

  • The USPTO has been reporting patent citations by applicants and examiners separately since Jan 2001, when a procedural change occurred.
  • Their data has about 500,000 granted patents, which I gather is approximately all the patents granted in 2001-2003. About 11,000 (2%) have no citations and so are excluded from most of the analysis
  • Finding (p3): examiners introduced 63% of all patent citations to US patents in the sample

So this works shows evidence that lots of inventors do not cite, and probably do not know, much of the literature known by examiners. It's US-specific, but the main principles probably extend. It helps us think about the difference between what is known, somewhere, and what the inventor per se knows or cares about. Presumably lots of inventors do not know what is in previous patents, and it would have been even harder to know back in the early aero period.


Original title Applicant and Examiner Citations in US Patents: An Overview and Analysis
Simple title Applicant and examiner citations in US patents
Authors Juan Alacecer, Michelle Gittelman, Bhaven N. Sampat
Date 2008
Countries US
Languages en
Keywords US patents, modern patents, patent examiners, prior art, patent citations
Journal SSRN, HBS
Related to aircraft? 0
Page count 41
Word count
Wikidata id
Retrieved from "http://econterms.net/aero/index.php?title=Alcacer,_Gittelman,_and_Sampat,_2008&oldid=233145"