Bonum Certa Men Certa

“It’s No Longer Simply About Patent Quantity. It’s About Quality.”

Says the patent microcosm

Writing a check



Summary: Quality assessment of US patents is becoming a hotter topic now that PTAB cleans up the mess and courts oftentimes reject asserted patents (which are, on average, considered to be better)

THE truth of the matter is, many patents are of low quality, but those that end up in court are typically the better ones. A few days ago we stumbled upon this post from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP. It tracks PTAB's progress reassessing particularly bad US patents:



The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued 61 IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions in December, including decisions following remands from the Federal Circuit, cancelling 852 (73.83%) instituted claims while declining to cancel 301 (26.08%) instituted claims. Patent owners conceded only 1 claim (0.09%) through motions to amend or disclaimer in cases reaching a final decision. For comparison, the cumulative average rate of instituted claims cancelled in IPR and CBM Final Written Decisions is about 75%.


"investors have become much more sophisticated. It’s no longer simply about patent quantity. It’s about quality," Finnegan wrote in another new article. Here's the relevant part:

Not so long ago, during investment rounds, the IP due diligence typically conducted by a VC or CVC involved little more than asking, “How many patents does your company have?” A satisfactory number provided in response often ended the inquiry.

Today however, investors have become much more sophisticated. It’s no longer simply about patent quantity. It’s about quality. Now, investors often spend the time between the term sheet and the closing carefully assessing the blocking power of the investment’s patent portfolio. They examine the IP with a magnifying glass. If investors are not satisfied with the strength of a patent portfolio, they walk away from the deal or lower the valuation.


It's difficult to say exactly or even roughly just what proportion of patents at the USPTO can actually survive a court's test, but we are guessing that number is not high. 5 days ago the PTAB-hostile Anticipat took note of PTAB's reassessment of (often throwing away) obvious patent applications. Here are some interesting numbers:

Obviousness is by far the most common rejection that gets appealed to the Board. This particular ground of rejection does not draw attention for being reversed at the low end or on the high end. Over the past year and a half, the 12,000 obviousness decisions were wholly reversed about a third (34%) of the time. 43% of the time are at least partially reversed. One might expect these rates to be uniform across tech centers. They are not.


Alice and software patents are of most interest to us. Many patents are just software patents disguised as "AI", "cloud", "on a device", or "over the Internet" etc.

"Anecdotally, I've found cross-examiner citing of the same prior art to be rare," wrote this patent attorney a few days ago. "Exception: In internet art units certain examiners definitely have their "everything under the sun on the internet" patent that is 1000 paragraphs long that they cite all the time."

This class of patents is unfortunately far too common. Why are such patents still being granted?

Several days ago Professor Michael Risch wrote about why many terrible patents get granted. Risch is worth reading because he is not part of the patent microcosm and at the same time he's familiar with the subject at hand. Here's his latest: [via]

Michael Frakes and Melissa Wasserman have gotten a lot of mileage out of their micro data set on patent examiner behavior over time. Prior work includes examination of grant incentives, agency funding, time availability, and user fees.


Examiners at the Office would be wise to reject by default (if merit cannot be found), but the way things are set up, they get more money and credit when they grant questionable patents. This, suffice to say, is a problem.

Recent Techrights' Posts

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Hijacked Again by Patent Litigation Industry, as President Cheeto Prioritises Aggressors
The "mafia" has taken over the "industry" and the Federal system (justice and constitutions trampled upon)
Ubuntu Slop and FUD Manufactured With LLMs and Funded (by Oneself) 'Studies'
Slop and FUD are ruining the Web
Gemini Links 01/04/2025: Games and More
Links for the day
Why We're Reporting Brett Wilson LLP for Apparently Misusing Their Licence to Protect American Microsofters Who Attack Women
For those who have not been keeping abreast
Stefano Maffulli and His Microsoft-Funded OSI Staff Are Killing the OSI and Killing "Open Source" (All for Money!)
This is far from over
Techrights Headlines as Semaphore
"If you are hearing this, thank you"
 
The Web Can Survive LLM Slop, But Only If We Collectively Shun and Discourage Serial Sloppers
Doing nothing ought not be a possibility
Amid Secret Shut-downs and Mass Layoffs at Microsoft (4 Waves of Layoffs in 3 Months of 2025) Some Microsoft Staff Expected to Go On Strike
workers going on strike
Gemini Links 02/04/2025: No more on Mastodon and Gemini Mention Script in Go
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, April 01, 2025
IRC logs for Tuesday, April 01, 2025
My Motion Disbarring or “Striking Off” Brett Wilson LLP for Enabling Violent Americans Who Try to Crush Microsoft Critics in the United Kingdom by Multiple SLAPPs
"Guns for hire" (for Microsoft people who received Microsoft salaries)
Links 01/04/2025: Apple Fined $162M for Privacy Abuses, Disinformation Online a Growing Concern
Links for the day
Newer Press Reports Confirm That Microsoft Shuts Down 'Hey Hi' (AI) Labs Despite All the Hype
The "hey hi" (AI) bubble is not sustainable
Links 01/04/2025: Mass Layoffs at Eidos and "Microsoft Pulls Back on Data Centers" (Demand Lacking); "Racist and Sexist" Slop From Microsoft
Links for the day
Gemini Links 01/04/2025: XKCDpunk and worldclock.py
Links for the day
50 Years of Sabotage and a Gut Punch to Computer Science (and Science in General)
Will we get back to science-based computing rather than cult-like following?
3 Months in 2025, 4 Waves of Mass Layoffs at Microsoft, Now Offices Shut Down Permanently
"A recent visit by the South China Morning Post confirmed that the office was dark, unoccupied, and had its logo removed."
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, March 31, 2025
IRC logs for Monday, March 31, 2025
Links 31/03/2025: China Tensions, Bombs Falling in Myanmar After Earthquake
Links for the day
Gemini Links 31/03/2025: Falling Out of Love With Tech, Sunsetting openSNP
Links for the day
R.T.O. at IBM in Texas and Atlanta (State of Georgia) Expected as "Soft Layoffs" Catalyst This Coming Year
It also sounds like more IBM layoffs are in the making
Law Firms Can Also Lose Their Licence for Clearly Misusing It
The bottom line is, never made the false assumption that because you can pile up SLAPPs in a docket you will not suffer from bad reputation or even get disbarred
Link between institutional abuse, Swiss jurists, Debianism and FSFE
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
LLM Slop Piggybacking News About GNU/Linux and Distorting It
new examples
Links 31/03/2025: Press and Democracy Under Further Attacks in the US, Attitudes Towards Slop Sour
Links for the day
Open Source Initiative (OSI) Privacy Fiasco in Detail: The OSI Does Not Respect Anybody's Privacy
The surveillance mafia that bans dissent or key people (even co-founders) with dissenting views
Gemini Links 31/03/2025: More X-Filesposting and Dreaming in Emacs
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, March 30, 2025
IRC logs for Sunday, March 30, 2025