BTI consulting group recently released its the results of a survey of 370 corporate counsel at Fortune 1000 companies. The graph above shows the expected legal budget change over the next six months grouped by type of work. Notice “Intellectual Property” down 4.3% and in the basement “IP Litigation” down 7.7%.
Read more here.
Background: Economic Downturn => Downturn in Patent Filings
Dearest Dennis,
Can I tell a story in some blogs that will soon be showcased on Facebook with real Documents and Evidence. And I would like to tell 6, that if a new Director is brought in “NEW” being the operative word. Maybe things will change because 6 speaks the truth. And maybe then He will get promoted. I plan to also write a book. But that plan will be decided in Sept. as to the way it will be written. Fiction or non.
As usual you will not print this. But I am used to the altering of my blogs and also ignored blogs.
Guppy with sharp teeth
“Actual Inventor” is, once again, dead wrong.
The reason patent attorneys exist is NOT because of inventors–it is because of the statutory patent scheme that congress has chosen to implement.
If inventors were the reason for the existence of patent attorneys, there would have been plenty of patent attorneys around when there were inventors but no statutory scheme.
But of course, there were none.
“Actual Inventor” is completely wrong, once again.
This is an interesting post.
Assuming no changes to the patent system, I can’t help but think that this is a trend that will swing back the other way (albeit slowly, perhaps) as the instability in the economy settles down. I’m interested to hear what other people think, though.
If these meandering, repetitive, and worthless posts are coming from JD, you SHOULD be better that this & I KNOW that you know better. It seems to be beneath even you.
If they are just coming from JD wannabes (as it seems), you are doing a moderately decent job of cutting & pasting his various posts but adding no originality. Guess that equates to your quality as an attorney as well.
Sounds like you are just one of those mindless drones working for the man & just paper shuffling between the applicant & the PTO without being allowed, or able, to add any original thought or content. You probably can not even go to lunch or take a dump without their OK. Man, your life really sucks, doesn’t it!
Now, TRY to do something like add a worthwhile contribution, or at least be vaguely original. Then again, I bet that is WAY above your level of (in)competance.
MVS
“(1) go out guns blazing in a wave of ip litigation by selling off most of the assets, firing employees, etc. and trying to earn some quick money in settlement/litigation with their IP assets”–mmmbeer
Gotta love that imagery!
anon,
Thanks for reading. But I think your post more accurately reflects the Office Action generating process over at the PTO. 🙂
“RC Cola and a Moon Pie” – great NRBQ song.
TwoBobs,
I have no idea what your patent experience is, but working for a major corporation, I can say that what patents will be valuable and which won’t is very difficult. Some of the patents we have asserted and/or counter-asserted in litigation have been ones that were considered strong and others were on or close to the chopping block during maintenance reviews.
“He would be the only one old (and dumb enough) enough to remember RC cola & moonpies.”
Hey! I fondly remember RC cola & moonpies. Actually, I just had a moonpie last week, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
“anon, you’re starting to catch on. There may be hope for you yet. Get out now, or else you’ll end up like the stoogiest stooge of the PTO stooges (aka MVS) and have no skills other than inserting misspellings into form paragraphs. :-)”
Really, just randomly combine the phrases “LOL,” “(mis)management,” “get out,” and “form paragraphs,” assume that anyone who disagrees with you is in the PTO, make sure nothing you’ve said could possibly be conducive to an adult conversation, and you’ve got another fine John Darling post.
“You can not argue with the truth that I post”
LOL
The truth you post? What’s that? The banal, pedestrian, plodding, misspelled platitudes that you bore us all with?
Puh-leeze.
You’re a mid-level-(mis)management slavish stooge. You go to your meetings with your slave masters and they give you your orders that you follow like a good little slave. Then you come here and post your nonsense that you challenge your slave masters and ask the tough questions. We all know that’s a bunch of bull. You’re a typical donothingknownothinguselessdeadweight over there at the PTO. You’re probably one of those “administrative SPE’s” who does nothing but check time sheets. Your “contributions” are beyond microscopic.
anon, you’re starting to catch on. There may be hope for you yet. Get out now, or else you’ll end up like the stoogiest stooge of the PTO stooges (aka MVS) and have no skills other than inserting misspellings into form paragraphs. 🙂
A 7.7% drop really just reflects reducing the amount that won’t be paid to BigLaw body shops to continue the old model of churning hours on large patent litigation projects.
Unless you’re a first, second, third, or maybe fourth year at a BigLaw shop, these numbers show a very insignificant change. Another tempest in search of a teapot.
MVS Wrote: “It is really amazing the venom that so many of you attorneys show toward examiners.”
Ha! That’s nothing compared to the venom for “Actual Inventors” that dare to read, write and think for themselves.
MVS wrote: ” If there is no examination/prosecution going on, what need will there be for all the attorneys that only (or primarily) do prosecution??”
What need is there now, besides large corporate filings? Look MVS what you and the attorneys are forgetting is that the “Actual Inventor” is the reason your job exists. So perhaps you should ask, If there are no “Actual Inventors” what need will there be for anyone?
As far as those attorneys that can only do prosecution, let them go the way of the Milk Man, it will be a better off for everyone.
Sounds like more johndarling. He would be the only one old (and dumb enough) enough to remember RC cola & moonpies.
I notice you STILL haven’t even attempted to counter anything I’ve said. Just baseless personal attacks.
Again, try something constructive or go away.
MVS
And you got to love Feynman. The PTO continually proves that there’s unlimited room at the bottom.
Most inValuable Stooge, I stand with MVS = MostSlavishStooge and would like to throw and egg and moonpie at your face (to try and knock your nose off (+:| )
“Curious”, you are right. Things WERE much more cordial back in the 80s & 90s. And it was much easier & more pleasant to prosecute on both sides of the table. Things have changed since then & there is plenty of blame to go around.
Why? Largely because of those that we, on both sides, have to respond to & have no control over.
For examiners, it is upper management that changes emphasis (on quantity, then on “quality”, allowance error rates, etc.) and policy & then dump it on examiners to implement (without backing up the examiners, of course, when the $h1t hits the fan). So, with many SPEs under the gun to lower errors they decide (“unofficially”) to not allow cases unless they are “clearly” allowable. Throw in 2nd pair of eyes & examiners are stuck & often forced to reject whether they want to or not. For juniors, if the SPE will not sign it they have no choice except to reject (somehow) or let the case go overdue & get hammered on their PAP. Not making excuses just pointing out where we are & how we got there.
For attorneys, you have to deal with the often inconsistent and uninformative decisions coming out of the various courts (much more than examiners do – you have to put up with decisions that will effect litigation & not just prosecution). Everything from Festo to Bilski etc. makes it more difficult for you to prosecute a case. If you make an amendment (particularly limiting scope) you may get hammered in court or even threatened with malpractice. For 101 nobody knows where it stands. Now add in applicant’s that are reluctant to give up any scope or view patents as a lottery they may hit with a broad claim & you are in a worse position than years ago.
Now, combine these two and what do you get? The mess we are in now. Examiners are much like attorneys in that we are both often limited in what we would like to do with a case to get it disposed. It is just where the system has gotten to today. I really think that if an average examiner & average attorney get together to get something reasonable allowed, they can. It may just not be what those over them would want to see happen.
MVS
“MVS = MostSlavishStooge” AKA johndarling (whether you admit it or not, we all know the truth),
You can not argue with the truth that I post so you resort to the abyss of small minds. Seems appropriate. Now, TRY to contribute something worthwhile ro just dry up & go away.
MVS
Wow, there is fear that the pie is getting smaller and the fight for the pieces of it is getting nasty. Where’s the moderator?
MVS — back in the 80’s and 90’s the relationship between examiners and attorneys was relatively cooperative, and in the past 7 or so years it has become more adversarial (and I blame this on PTO upper management)
“Yes, we can go start chasing ambulances. But what are all of the mid-level-(mis)management stooges whose only skill is inserting misspellings into form paragraphs going to do?”
I’m starting to think you use form paragraphs for your vitriolic forum postings, JD.
RIF’ed federal employees are entitled to be appointed to any open position in government at or below their GS level that they meet the minimum requirements for.
These PTO managers would probably end up running (because of their high GS levels) some random government agencies.
“It is really amazing the venom that so many of you attorneys show toward examiners. Towards upper management, I can understand.”
And towards mid-level-(mis)management stooges.
You still can’t spell. It’s “…against your better advice.”
Yes, we can go start chasing ambulances. But what are all of the mid-level-(mis)management stooges whose only skill is inserting misspellings into form paragraphs going to do?
It is really amazing the venom that so many of you attorneys show toward examiners. Towards upper management, I can understand. They set the policies. But not toward the average examiner. Examiners are, largely, at the mercy of the policy that management sets.
Should examiners get PO-ed at the attorneys because their applicant tells them to prosecute in a less than ideal way (probably against your better advise)? No. And it works both ways.
On top of that, most of you need to remember that prosecutors & examiners are largely symbiotic positions WRT one another and if examiners go so will most of you prosecutors. If there is no examination/prosecution going on, what need will there be for all the attorneys that only (or primarily) do prosecution?? Only so many can go do litigation (and the chart above shows that is going down also). Guess you can go start chasing ambulances 🙂 (Oh, BTW, it is a LOT easier to fire unneeded attorneys than it would be to fire or RIF government employees.)
So try not to go enjoy the cutting off of your nose to spite your face.
MVS
“I predict that Examiner 6k will be separated from the USPTO by year end.”
I predict I’ll have a promotion by year’s end.
I have a fortune 500 company as a client who files in India, China, and Korea all the time. It doesn’t seem to make economic sense to file anywhere but the us, europe, and canada. (I mention Canada because it’s easy and cheap to get patents there and they do have a real court system).
mmmbeer, may be true.
I’m seeing many clients (plaintiffs and defendants) that are very eager to settle. Pay a bit more/collect a bit less, but stop paying big $$$ to us lawyers. Even if the number of cases is flat to increasing, the total budget is lower.
On the prosecution side, I’m seeing clients that are abandoning cases for many reasons (difficult to detect infringement, market area not as important as originally thought, etc.) with a much lower threshold than before.
Also, they don’t have any patience for USPTO shenanigans. Perhaps interview, then abandon or appeal. No more RCE gravy train for examiners.
mmmbeer makes a good point regarding foreign filings
That’s an interesting prediction on IP Lit. I think that this might be true at the top of the economic/corporate food chain, at least for litigation INITIATED by those companies. However, this is probably not true for companies that are struggling or for companies that stand to pick off the intellectual property of those companies that either enter bankruptcy or are staving it off.
There is always a risk that those companies will either (1) go out guns blazing in a wave of ip litigation by selling off most of the assets, firing employees, etc. and trying to earn some quick money in settlement/litigation with their IP assets; or (2) companies acquiring the interest in certain IP rights [from bankruptcy or purchase of assets of a flailing company] that see little to lose in firing off a wave of litigation AGAINST those big companies.
As to prosecution, I think that there are some hidden numbers in those numbers. Such as, how much of the reduction will be attributed to not filing foreign applications? Foreign filings can be quite costly with little or no economic upside in a majority of situations. How often do you here of a fortune 100/500 company filing a patent case in say, India, Russia, or China?
I predict that Examiner 6k will be separated from the USPTO by year end.
To quote Feynman, “There’s a lot of room at the bottom.” Once GC figure out that most patents are worse than worthless, they will stop trying to get them for the sake of getting them, and focus their IP dollar on those few real inventions that show promise.
Comments are closed.