Where Patent Attorneys Work: Big In House

The majority of US patent practitioners continue to work within traditional law firm environments. However, thousands serve as in-house counsel to innovative companies throughout the world. The following is a list of the top employers of US patent practitioners.

Company

IBM

3M

Johnson & Johnson

QUALCOMM

Procter & Gamble

Pfizer

Microsoft

Hewlett-Packard

MERCK

Intel

Medtronic

ELI LILLY

Google

Amgen

General Electric

Intellectual Ventures

Genentech

Research-In-Motion

Abbott Laboratories

Boeing

Bristol Myers Squibb

Dow Chemical

Monsanto

Life Technologies

Caterpillar

Chevron

Texas Instruments

Siemens

Xerox

Alcatel Lucent

Thomson Licensing/Technicolor

Glaxo Smith Kline

Canon

Wyeth

Apple

Nokia

Honeywell International

Novartis Pharmaceuticals

E I DuPont de Nemours

Shell Oil

Schlumberger Technology

Becton Dickinson

Baxter Healthcare

Eastman Kodak

ExxonMobil

Corning

Pioneer Hi Bred International

BP America

Boston Scientific

Deere

13 thoughts on “Where Patent Attorneys Work: Big In House

  1. but not before first transferring their patents into their own “separate” entities (including LLCs) to hide their ownership from the prying eyes of the media and the public

    Um, you do know that in order to sue, you are required to list the real party in interest, right?

  2. … and furthermore, not just, many of these (and other) product providing companies have in these past few years begun suing other product providing companies with various of their patents … but not before first transferring their patents into their own “separate” entities (including LLCs) to hide their ownership from the prying eyes of the media and the public … making them, too both NPEs … and trolls as well.

  3. I built this table from the PTO's database of registered practitioners. The reason that I didn't post the numbers originally is that the PTO database is riddled with problems. So, while I'm confident that this is a good list, I'm not very confident that the underlying numbers are correct.  With that caveat, here you go: 

    link to docs.google.com

  4. The reason that I didn't present the underlying numbers is that they are not entirely accurate.  Thus, my 'facts' presented would be somewhat misleading.  The problem is that this data comes from the USPTO database of registered patent law practitioners and that database is not well updated.  

    IBM
    144

    E I DuPont de
    Nemours
    115

    3M
    102

    Johnson
    Johnson
    100

    QUALCOMM
    98

    Pfizer
    78

    Microsoft
    69

    Hewlett
    Packard
    63

    Exxon Mobil
    62

    MERCK
    61

    Intel
    56

    Medtronic
    52

    Glaxo Smith
    Kline
    50

    ELI LILLY
    49

    Amgen
    48

    Google
    48

    General
    Electric
    47

    Intellectual
    Ventures
    46

    Research In
    Motion
    44

    Genentech
    44

    Abbott
    Laboratories
    43

    Boeing
    42

    The Dow
    Chemical
    39

    Monsanto
    37

    Life
    Technologies
    34

    Caterpillar
    34

    Chevron
    33

    Texas
    Instruments
    29

    Xerox
    27

    Alcatel Lucent
    26

    Thomson
    Licensing
    26

    Canon
    23

    Apple
    21

    Nokia
    20

    Honeywell
    International
    19

    Novartis
    Pharmaceuticals
    19

    Shell Oil
    19

    Corning
    Incorporated
    18

    Baxter
    Healthcare
    18

    Eastman Kodak
    18

    Pioneer Hi
    Bred Internati
    18

    Becton
    Dickinson
    18

    BP America
    17

    Deere
    17

    University of
    California
    17

    Motorola
    Mobility
    16

  5. A content free post. What would have been interesting it to add … Content.

    How many attorneys? How many are registered with USPTO? What attorneys worked p. patents vs which work on licensing and enforcement? I’ve worked on patent cases where of a team of five attorneys only one is a registered patent attorney.

  6. It’s not a legal issue either. You are reading into law a value judgement based on some misunderstanding of what a patent is (it is a negative right, not a right to practice or “make products” at all.

    Please contain your anti-Troll bias.

  7. P.S. the PTO patent attorney and agents roster by companies includes some in-house patent attorneys that have trasferred over to doing general legal [not patent] work. Also, some in-house engineers that took and passed the PTO examination to become registered patent agents, but have never actually represented anyone else at the PTO.

  8. The NPE’s that are the problem – patent trolls – only have patents they acquired from others. Theythreaten and sue on almost all of those aquired patents, because that is their ONLY “businesss”. A very lucrative lawsuit business that is greatly increasing. [Wait to see the GAO report.]
    Large performing (product providing) companies get patents to protect their own products and inventions, and only sue on a very small percentage of their patent portfolio, as Dennis or other statistics providers can easily prove.

    This is not just a semantics issue.

  9. How many in-house patent attorneys did it take to get onto this list? Also, how current is this? Some companies listed here have outsourced most of their patent work and substantially reduced their in-house staff. If this data is from the PTO roster, it is impacted both by patent attorneys who fail to timely provide the PTO with their new addresses and any PTO delay in entering new addresses.

Comments are closed.