Professors Stuart J.H. Graham and Dietmar Harhoff published a
paper recently that analyzed the potential effects of a
post-grant review procedure (opposition) in the U.S. One
particularly interesting aspect of their paper is the
comparison of litigated U.S. patents versus their EU
counterparts. The paper found that:
• EPO opposition rates of the twins of U.S. litigated patents
are about 3 times higher than for non-litigated patents (20%
versus 6%). Not surprisingly, EPO applications relating to
litigated patents are broader in scope, have more claims,
contain more references to earlier patents, and receive more
citations from subsequent patents;
• On the opposition outcomes, between 22.6 and 24.4% of
litigated patents are revoked at the EPO. This is lower
compared to the 27.6-39.5% of non-litigated patents.
Surprisingly, approximately 14% of oppositions are abandoned by
the owner.
• EPO applications that directly relate to U.S. litigated
patents have a higher grant rate (80.3%) than equivalents of
non-litigated patents (67.9%); and
• The European model tends to exclude equivalents of litigated
U.S. patents due to an increased likelihood of opposition, and
not by virtue of lower grant rates, or less favorable
opposition outcomes;
Professors Graham and Harhoff then performed certain societal
"welfare calculations" to conclude that instituting a
post-grant review (PGR) system in the U.S could have quite a
significant impact on social welfare, provided that the cost of
the PGR system is kept reasonably low (<$500k):
[O]ur analysis and welfare calculations suggest that the benefit from PGR review in terms of social welfare per year—when put in dollar terms—could be nearly $25 billion. The main parameter affecting this estimate is not savings on the cost of litigation, but the social costs of currently unlitigated patents that bestow excessive market power on some applicants. This market power either allows the patentee to extort licensing fees, or force competitors to invent around the respective patent. But even when we draw a conservative scenario, and assume a very low social cost figure of $1 million on average for these patents, our benefit-cost ratios still indicate that the benefits of such an institution compares very favorably to its costs.
For more information, read/download "Separating Patent Wheat from Chaff: Would the U.S. Benefit from Adopting a Patent Post-Grant Review? "
