ARE THERE HALLMARKS OF IMPORTANT PATENTS? SCIENTIFIC DONALD WALTER NOVEMBER 11, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ACN/PCN module in PEP Monique FUERI Director Operational Performance
Advertisements

A LITIGATOR’S ADVICE ON LITIGATION AVOIDANCE Alan N. Greenspan Jackson Walker LLP © 2004 by Alan N. Greenspan. All rights reserved.
© 2013 Sri U-Thong Limited. All rights reserved. This presentation has been prepared by Sri U-Thong Limited and its holding company (collectively, “Sri.
Pension Fund Trustees Liability Ncedi Mbongwe. Introduction to Camargue Underwriting Managers Established in 2001 Underwriters: Mutual and Federal and.
Irish recovery? Pär Magnusson
The America Invents Act (AIA) - Rules and Implications of First to File, Prior Art, and Non-obviousness -
September 14, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December.
Innovations in Structured Products October 25, 2010 An Innovator’s Dilemma?
Introduction to Intellectual Property using the Federal Acquisitions Regulations (FAR) To talk about intellectual property in government contracting, we.
Sound Practice Guidance update Glasgow, 7 th November 2014 IOR Scottish Chapter The Institute of Operational Risk Brian Rowlands FIOR ©
Jul The New Geant4 License J. Perl The New Geant4 License Makes clear the user’s wide- ranging freedom to use, extend or redistribute Geant4, even.
Workshop on Management of Intellectual Property by Photographers Beijing, China, December 8 and 9, 2005.
An invention is a unique or novel device, method, composition or process. It may be an improvement upon a machine or product, or a new process for creating.
FPGA and ASIC Technology Comparison - 1 © 2009 Xilinx, Inc. All Rights Reserved How do I Get Started with PlanAhead?
Privacy, Confidentiality and Duty to Warn in School Guidance Services March 2006 Disclaimer - While the information in these slides are designed to reflect.
Anticipated 2008 Generic Launches JULY 2008 David Harding, API Intelligence, Thomson Reuters Source: FDA, NEWPORT HORIZON PREMIUM TM © THOMSON REUTERS.
Ide kerülhet az előadás címe CCTV operation at work Belgrade, 11 th April 2013.
YOUR RELIABLE PARTNER. “Taxation of intellectual property, research & development in Russian Federation”
PRODUCTIVITY – THE PICTURE FOR THE UK & THE WEST MIDLANDS SUSTAINING COMPETITIVENESS CONFERENCE – THE BELFRY RHYS HERBERT SENIOR ECONOMIST 6 JULY 2012.
MESSAGING IN THE MEDIA TOP 10 DRUGS BASED ON CREDIBILITY INDEX IN THE LITERATURE JOHN KNAPP, DIRECTOR OF ANALYTICS MAY 2009 Your use of these materials.
Andrew McNab - License issues - 10 Apr 2002 License issues for EU DataGrid (on behalf of Anders Wannanen) Andrew McNab, University of Manchester
July 18, U.S.C. 103(c) as Amended by the Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act (Public Law ) Enacted December 10,
Therapeutic area breakdown of lead projects in development for first launch in 2005 APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM ©
Resume Builder Todd Abel, Microsoft Copyright Notice © 2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
IBIS-AMI and Direction Decisions
Paragraph IV Patent Challenges – As of July 1, 2008 JULY 2008 David Harding, API Intelligence, Thomson Reuters Source: FDA, NEWPORT HORIZON PREMIUM TM.
Proportion of biotech-derived active substances in development for first launch 31st December APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE.
International Telecommunication Union New Delhi, India, December 2011 ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues Philip.
Legal Disclaimers Accuracy Every effort is made to provide information that is accurate. However any information contained in this website or the “article.
1 CS 501 Spring 2003 CS 501: Software Engineering Lecture 5 Legal Aspects of Software Engineering I.
Oracle Fusion Applications 11gR1 ( ) Functional Overview (L2) Manage Inbound Logistics (L3) Manage Supplier Returns.
Proportion of total R&D expenditure by therapeutic area in 2005 APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM © THOMSON REUTERS Your.
Oracle Fusion Applications 11gR1 ( ) Functional Overview (L2) Manage Inbound Logistics (L3) Manage and Disposition Inventory Returns.
Global R&D expenditure, development times, global pharmaceutical sales and new molecular entity output MARCH 2008 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL.
1 28 June 2006 © ip21 Limited 2006 Intellectual Property Issues for the Consultant Matthew Dixon, Chartered Patent Attorney, ip21 Limited
2005/2006 Expenditure on biotech derived entities had remained constant APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM © THOMSON REUTERS.
Number of pharmaceutical patent applications and granted patents for 5 major patent issuing authorities JUNE 2008 SOURCE: DERWENT WORLD PATENTS.
PATENTS, INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS Presented By: Navdeep World Trade Organization.
Regulatory approval times between submission and marketing authorization approval APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM.
Availability of High-Quality API for India, China and Rest of World MARCH 2008 David Harding, API Intelligence, Thomson Reuters Source: NEWPORT HORIZON.
Allocation of R&D expenditure in 2005 between chemical entity and biological or biotech active substances APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE.
Intellectual Property and Public Policy: Application of Flexibilities in the International IP and Trade system --Limitation and Exceptions for Education.
October 2012 Admission of professional participants – non-credit institutions to trading on the Moscow Exchange FX market.
The secure site rendering issue (all navigation crushed together as a list at the top of the page) is a compatibility issue with Internet Explorer only.
Copyright © 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle Proprietary and Confidential. 1.
Article 4 [Obligations of Applicant] 4.1. As a sole and exclusive owner of the Application, Applicant warrants that.
Connectivity to bank and sample account structure
RaboDirect Financial Health Barometer 2016
BIOLOGY / CHEMISTRY CITATIONS GROWTH
Automation in an XML Authoring Environment
Messaging in the Media TOP 10 AUDIENCES BY THERAPY AREA
Agreements OSR Symposium
2006 Revenue continued to depend on a relatively small number of products APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM © THOMSON REUTERS.
, R&D expenditure showed 6% growth annually
2002–2006 Mid and Other sized companies continued to launch the majority of NMEs APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM © THOMSON.
Proportional change of enrolled patients in each geographical region between 2000 and 2006 MARCH 2008 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM.
Proportion of total R&D expenditure on alliances or joint ventures by stage of R&D in 2005 APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS PROGRAM.
ExhibitorLive 2018 IFES Global Village
NME/NAS launches in 2005/6 APRIL 2007
% of the projects in development in the leading therapeutic areas were considered to have a novel mode of action APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL.
Defensive Medicine Debate
Environmental Upgrade Finance
Motivation for 36OU Open Rack
Pipeline size of Major companies had grown at a steadier rate than that of smaller companies APRIL 2007 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE.
Development time for new molecular entities first launched onto the world market between MARCH 2008 SOURCE: CMR INTERNATIONAL PERFORMANCE METRICS.
Cycle times decreased in larger but not smaller, companies
Proportion of total R&D expenditure by function in 2005
© 2013 Sri U-Thong Limited. All rights reserved
Emotional Intelligence: The Core of Family Offices
2019 MEDICARE AGE-IN STUDY SENIOR MARKET INSIGHTS SERVICE Part IV
Presentation transcript:

ARE THERE HALLMARKS OF IMPORTANT PATENTS? SCIENTIFIC DONALD WALTER NOVEMBER 11, 2008

2 WHAT IS AN IMPORTANT PATENT? One or more of the following; Commercially important –Patents that protect an important invention –Patents that block a competitor from practicing a technology Technological breakthroughs –Patents that disclose brand new technology

3 HOW DO YOU RECOGNIZE AN IMPORTANT PATENT? Patent markings on the product In the pharmaceutical area, patents that protect drugs are listed in the Orange Book ( Patent has been maintained & not been allowed to expire Patent life has been extended (e.g. Supplementary Protection Certificates) Patent family size vs. very selective country coverage (in context!) Mentioned in Company reports / web-sites Licensed to other companies (i.e. someone has been willing to pay money or future royalties to get access to it) –(e.g. the PDL (Queen) patents licensed to everyone who wants to produce an IZUMAB product) For technological importance, cited by large numbers of later patents (controversial) If it has been litigated (e.g. West publishing, LitAlert ® db)

4 TEST CASES; FINDING IMPORTANT PATENTS, AND SEE WHAT PROPERTIES THEY MAY HAVE IN COMMON

5 FIND THE MOST IMPORTANT OF THESE DRUGS Find those drugs with sales >$1bn

6 FIND THE PATENTS NOS. FOR THOSE DRUGS FROM THE US FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION ORANGE BOOK

7 CONSIDER, FOR EXAMPLE THE VALSARTAN PATENT FROM THE PREVIOUS SLIDE

8 IT WAS MATCHED WITH PATENTS OF “ROUTINE” IMPORTANCE

9 FEATURES WERE MATCHED AGAINST “ROUTINELY” IMPORTANT PATENT

HOW DO THE VERY IMPORTANT PATENT COMPARE TO THE “ROUTINELY” IMPORTANT PATENTS?

11 ARE THE FAMILIES OF VERY IMPORTANT PATENTS GENERALLY BIGGER THAN ROUTINELY IMPORTANT PATENTS? The number of patent publications pursued may be proportional to its importance –If the importance of an invention drops, the number of jurisdictions in which protection is required may drop

12 DWPI PATENT FAMILY SIZE Min = minimum Max = maximum Avg = Average ESD = Estimated standard deviation TTEST = The probability associated with a Student's t-Test. Used to determine whether two samples are likely to have come from the same two underlying populations that have the same mean.

13 A BETTER INDICATOR OF BREADTH OF COVERAGE; NUMBER OF COUNTRIES The number of countries in a patent family is calculated by summing the number of countries represented by the documents listed in the family, including the designated states in EP and PCT (WO) documents EP and PCT are not themselves counted as countries

14 COUNTRY COVERAGE

15 GRANTED PATENTS

16 HOW ABOUT THE SIZE OF A CLAIM? Theory; Smaller claims are broader, and therefore more comprehensive –It takes more words to describe a fundamental invention (“a chair”) than to describe the narrower embodiments with certain unexpected advantages (“a chair made from dilithium crystals and having left-handed wings”)

17 OUR VALSARTAN PATENT Claim was copied and pasted into Microsoft ® Office Word, which counted the words

18 ESTIMATED NUMBER OF WORDS IN CLAIM 1

19

20 IF YOU HAVE A TRULY NOVEL INVENTION, THERE MAY NOT BE AN INDEXING TERM TO DESCRIBE IT For example, if there is no IPC for “chairs made with dilithium crystals”, then the patent is likely to get a generic “chair” IPC Count the number of IPCs at the group level (ANNA-NNNN/00) from patent offices that should assign them to the subgroup level (ANNA ‑ NNNN/NN)

21 GROUP LEVEL, INVENTIVE IPCs FROM ADVANCED IPC POs (DWPI RECORD)

22 MANUAL CODES; GENERIC? (DWPI RECORD)

23 GENERIC MARKUSH STRUCTURE? Out of 30 test patents

24 PATENT CITATIONS Presumably, if a whole technology rests on a patent (or a set of a few patents), later patents should cite earlier patents This is a controversial area –Rules for citing in patents are different than rules for citing in the technical literature –Sometimes a patent is cited frequently because it really is the basis for a later technology –Sometimes a patent is cited frequently because it is an examiner’s favorite or is handy It is easy to look at limited data – US patents citing US patents. But is it correct? Is it indicative? It is also easy to look at more sophisticated data – patent family member citing patent family member – possibly a member from a different patent office. But is it indicative?

25 SIMPLE ANALYSIS – US CASE CITING US CASE

26 PATENT CITATION INDEX* * Formerly Derwent Patent Citation Index

27 CONCLUSIONS I tested the notion that you could tell if a patent is important by taking a set of very important patents, and comparing certain features to a set of matched routinely important patents In this set, the very important patents had –Significantly larger DWPI patent family size, whether including published applications or –only counting granted patents; –Calculating the country coverage for granted patents; or –Significantly larger number of Derwent family-to-family citations accumulated In this set, there was no significant difference between the test sets and control set in the –Indexing (IPCs or Derwent Manual Codes), –Claim size or –US-to-US citations accumulated

28 SPECULATION The importance of a patent is proven over time –E.g., There are lots of drugs patented, but many fewer that make it to clinical trials and even fewer that make it to pharmacopeia shelves Most of the traits examined are created when the patent is written, published or indexed, long before the invention is proven worthwhile The importance of a patent depends on many commercial factors unrelated to how patents are written or where they are applied for

29 THANKS TO MANY FRIENDS … Gez Cross Ron Kaminecki Georg Richter Peter Steele Bob Stembridge Abraham Karkowsky Adrian Walter-Ginzburg

30 AND THANK YOU!

Terms of Use and Disclaimer The materials contained in these slides may be used for your own use in presenting at conferences and meetings or for inclusion in reports provided that you acknowledge the source of the materials and include the following statement: “2008 © Thomson Reuters. Some of the materials and/or data in this [report, presentation, paper etc] are reproduced under a license from Thomson Reuters. You may not copy or re-distribute these materials in whole or in part without the written consent of Thomson Reuters”. Charts, graphs, and illustrations contained in these slides may not be decompiled, reverse engineered, or disassembled. The copyright and other intellectual property rights in these slides is owned by Thomson Reuters or its licensors. Except for the license set out in these Terms of Use, Thomson Reuters neither assigns any rights nor grants any licenses or rights in respect of these slides to you and any use of these slides other than in accordance with these Terms of Use is subject to Thomson Reuters’ prior written consent. For additional permissions, please contact: [contact ] THOMSON REUTERS MAKES NO WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION AS TO THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS OR CORRECTNESS OF ANY MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THESE SLIDES OR THAT ALL ERRORS IN THE SLIDES OR THE MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THESE SLIDES WILL BE CORRECTED. THOMSON REUTERS IS AN INFORMATION PROVIDER AND DOES NOT PROVIDE LEGAL, FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVICE. THE MATERIALS CONTAINED IN THESE SLIDES ARE FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY, ARE NOT INTENDED TO CONSTITUTE LEGAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVICE, AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED ON OR TREATED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR SPECIFIC ADVICE RELEVANT TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES. THOMSON REUTERS SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS THAT MAY ARISE FROM ANY RELIANCE BY YOU, YOUR EMPLOYER OR CLIENT, OR ANY OTHER THIRD PARTY, ON THE MATERIALS CONTAINED IN THESE SLIDES. THOMSON REUTERS WILL NOT BE LIABLE IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) OR OTHERWISE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE OR CONSEQUENTIAL LOSS OR DAMAGE ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THESE TERMS OF USE OR YOUR USE OF THE SLIDES, HOWEVER SUCH INDIRECT LOSS OR DAMAGE MAY ARISE. You shall not assign, sub-licence or delegate any of your rights or obligations under these Terms of Use without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters; any assignment, sub-licensing or delegation in breach of these Terms of Use shall be null and void. If any provision of these Terms of Use are determined to be illegal or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction it shall be deemed to have been deleted without affecting the remaining provisions. These Terms of Use will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. You hereby irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal and state courts located in Philadelphia, PA, USA.