Fixing the patent office

Innovation Policy and the Economy

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 83-100

  Lemley, Mark A ^a  

^a STANFORD LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875602628     PISSN: 15313468     EISSN: 15372618     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1086/668240     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abramowicz, Michael, and John F. Duffy. 2009. "Ending the Patenting Monopoly." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 157, no. 6:1541-1611.
2. Allison, John R., and Starling D. Hunter. 2006. "On the Feasibility of Improving Patent Quality One Technology at a Time: The Case of Business Methods." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 21, no. 2:729-94.
3. Allison, John R., and Mark A. Lemley. 1998. "Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents." AIPLA Quarterly Journal 26:185-275.
4. Allison, John R., Mark A. Lemley, and Joshua Walker. 2011. "Patent Quality and Settlement among Repeat Patent Litigants." Georgetown Law Journal 99, no. 3:677-712.
5. American Intellectual Property Law Association. 2011. 2011 Report of Economic Activity. Washington, DC: AIPLA.
6. Baudry, Marc, and Beatrice DuMont. 2006. "Patent Renewals as Options: Improving the Mechanism for Weeding Out Lousy Patents." Review of Industrial Organization 28, no. 1:41-62.
7. Benjamin, Stuart Minor, and Arti K. Rai. 2008. "Fixing Innovation Policy: A Structural Perspective." George Washington Law Review 77, no. 1:1-88.
8. Bessen, James, and Michael Meurer. 2008. Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats and Lawyers Put Innovation at Risk. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9. Burk, Dan L., and Mark A. Lemley. 2009. The Patent Crisis and How the Courts Can Solve It. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10. Cockburn, Iain, Sam Kortum, and Scott Stern. 2003. "Are All Patent Examiners Equal? The Impact of Examiner Characteristics." In Patents in the KnowledgeBased Economy, ed. Wesley Cohen and Steven Merrill. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
11. Cotropia, Christopher A. 2009. "Modernizing Patent Law's Inequitable Conduct Doctrine." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 24 no. 2:723-83.
12. Cotropia, Christopher A., et al. 2012. "Do Applicant Patent Citations Matter? Implications for the Presumption of Validity." Working paper, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1656568.
13. Crouch, Dennis. 2010. "Requests for Continued Examination Continue to Rise." Patently-O., http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2010/07/requests-for-continued-examination-continue-to-rise.html.
14. Farrell, Joseph, and Robert P. Merges. 2004. "Incentives to Challenge and Defend Patents: Why Litigation Won't Reliably Fix Patent Office Errors and Why Administrative Patent Review Might Help." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 19, no. 3:943-70.
15. Frakes, Michael, and Melissa Wasserman. 2012. "Does Agency Funding Affect Decisionmaking? An Empirical Assessment of the PTO's Granting Patterns." Working paper, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986542.
16. Graham, Stuart J. H., Bronwyn H. Hall, Dietmar Harhoff, and David C. Mowery. 2003. "Patent Quality Control: A Comparative Study of US Patent Reexaminations and European Patent Oppositions." In Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy, ed. Wesley Cohen and Steven Merrill. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
17. Guellec, Dominique, and Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie. 2007. The Economics of the European Patent System. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jaffe, Adam, and Josh Lerner. 2004. Innovation and Its Discontents. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Katznelson, Ron D. 2010. "Patent Examination Policy and the Social Costs of Examiner Allowance and Rejection Errors." Paper presented at the Stanford Technology Law Review Symposium on PTO Reform, February 26, Stanford, CA, http://works.bepress.com/rkatznelson/61.
19. Lemley, Mark A. 2001. "Rational Ignorance at the Patent Office." Northwestern University Law Review 95, no. 4:1495-1532.
20. Lemley, Mark A., Doug Lichtman, and Bhaven Sampat. 2005. "What to Do about Bad Patents." Regulation 28, no. 4:8-13.
21. Lemley, Mark A., and Kimberly A. Moore. 2004. "Ending Abuse of Patent Continuations." Boston University Law Review 84:63-123.
22. Lemley, Mark A., and Bhaven Sampat. 2008. "Is the Patent Office a Rubber Stamp?" Emory Law Review 58, no. 1:181-206.
23. Lemley, Mark A., and Bhaven Sampat. 2012. "Examiner Characteristics and Patent Office Outcomes" Review of Economics and Statistics 94, no. 3:817-27.
24. Lichtman, Douglas, and Mark A. Lemley. 2007. "Rethinking Patent Law's Presumption of Validity." Stanford Law Review 60, no. 1:45-72.
25. Love, Brian. 2012. "An Empirical Study of Patent Litigation Timing: Could a Patent Term Reduction Decimate Trolls without Harming Innovators?" Unpublished manuscript, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1917709.
26. Noveck, Beth Simone. 2006. "'Peer to Patent': Collective Intelligence, Open Review, and Patent Reform." Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 20, no. 1:123-62.
27. Rai, Arti K. 2009. "Growing Pains in the Administrative State: The Patent Office's Troubled Quest for Managerial Control." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 157, no. 6:2051-81.
28. Schwartz, David L., and Christopher B. Seaman. 2012. "The Presumption of Patent Validity: An Experimental Study." Working paper, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2110342.
29. Seymore, Sean. Forthcoming. "The Presumption of Patentability." Minnesota Law Review, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2012897.
30. Thomas, John R. 2002. "The Responsibility of the Rulemaker: Comparative Approaches to Patent Administration Reform." Berkeley Technology Law Journal 17, no. 2:727-61.
31. Tucker, Catherine. 2012. "Patent Trolls and Technology Diffusion." Unpublished manuscript, http://www.nber.org/confer/2012/IPKE/Tucker.pdf.
32. Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno. 2010. "The Quality Factor in Patent Systems." Working paper 2010-027, European Center for Advanced Research in Economics and Statistics, Brussels.
33. Vertinsky, Liza. 2010. "Comparing Alternative Institutional Paths to Patent Reform." Alabama Law Review 61, no. 3:501-52.
34. Wasserman, Melissa F. 2011. "The PTO's Asymmetric Incentives: Pressure to Expand Substantive Patent Law." Ohio State Law Journal 72, no. 2:379-435.