This paper presents an empirical analysis of the determinants of patent litigation based on information from U.S. patent cases involved in Chinese enterprises. The author divided the patent characteristic into intrinsic trait, existed when a patent is born, and acquire trait, developed after a patent has issued. Three variables are used to describe intrinsic characteristics, claims, prior citations and family size. Patent maintenance, reexamination, forward citing, assignment, securitization and other variables are used to describe acquired characteristics and to analyze the relevance of patent intrinsic characteristics, patent acquired characteristics and patent infringement litigation. By using the U.S. patent cases involved Chinese enterprises, the relationship between patent characteristic and likelihood of the litigation is empirically analyzed. The result shows that the patents which end up in litigation have markedly difference in both intrinsic and acquired characteristics than patents that do not. On the other hand, such differences can provide additional indicia of likelihood of patent litigation, and help companies to identify the riskiest patents prior to the time of the litigation. The research has implications to the Chinese enterprises who want to extend the U.S market.
Key words
Chinese enterprises /
international operation /
patent risk /
intrinsic characteristic /
acquired characteristic
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] Gretchen Ann Bender. Uncertainty and unpredictability in patent litigation: The time is ripe for a consistent claim construction methodology[J]. Journal of Intellectual Property Law, 2001, 8: 175.
[2] Mark A. Lemely. Rational ignorance of patent office[J]. Northwestern University Law Review, 2001, 95 (4):1495.
[3] Jean O. Lanjouw and Mark Schankerman. Characteristic of patent litigation: A window on competition[J]. The RAND Journal of Economics, 2001, 32(1): 129-151.
[4] John R. Allison, Emerson H. Tiller. The business method patent myth[J]. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2003, 18 (4):989.
[5] Katrin Cremers. Determinants of patent litigation in germany[R]. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 04-72, 2004.
[6] 毛金生,谢小勇,刘淑华. 海外专利侵权诉讼[M]. 北京:知识产权出版社,2012.
[7] 王承守,邓颖懋.美国专利诉讼攻防策略运用[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
[8] 张平. 产业利益的博弈—美国337调查[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2010.
[9] 国家知识产权局保护协调司 组织编写. 中国企业海外知识产权纠纷典型案例启示录[M]. 北京: 知识产权出版社, 2010.
[10] John R. Allison, Mark A. Lemely, Kimberly A. Moore and R. Derek Trunkey. Valuable patents[J]. Georgetown Law Journal, 2004, 92(1): 435.
[11] Christopher A. Cotropia. The folly of early filing in patent law[J]. Hastings Law Journal, 1009, 61(1).
[12] 朱雪忠, 漆苏. 美国专利改革法案内容及其影响评析[J].知识产权, 2011(9): 79-89.
[13] Barry P.Global & Amy EL Schoenhard. Patent re-examination procedure as a litigation startegy[N]. IAM MAGAZINE, 2011.
[14] Reexamination Information, U.S PAT. & TRADEMARK OFFICE[EB/OL], http://www.uspto.gov/patents/stats/Reexamination_Information.jsp, 登录日期:2012年6月6日.
[15] Moore. Can David compete with Goliath in our patent model[R]. Working paper, 2003.
[16] John R.Allison, Mark A. Lemely and J.H. Walker. Extreme value or trolls on top? The characteristics of the most litigated patents[J]. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 2009, 158(1): 38.
[17] Xuan- Thao Nguyen. Collateralizing intellectual property[J]. Georgia Law Review, 2007, 42(1).
[18] Kyle Tondo -Kramer. Increasing access to startup financing through IP securitization[J]. Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law, 2010, 27: 613.
[19] http://info.usitc.gov/ouii/public/337inv.nsf/56ff5fbca63b069e 852565460078c0ae? SearchView.[EB/OL],最后检索日期:2012年6月10日.
[20] http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignments/?db=pat[EB/OL], 最后检索日期:2012年6月15日.
[21] http://www.google.com/googlebooks/uspto-patents-assignments.html#1980-2011[EB/OL], 最后检索日期:2012年6月6日.
[22] Chiristina Lui. Navigating through the legal minefield of state and federal filing for perfecting security interests in intellectual property[J]. Santa Clara Law Review, 2011, 51(2):705.
PDF(1 KB)
