The Top 25 US Patent Classes for Patent Quality
 |
Written by Gene Quinn President & Founder of IPWatchdog, Inc. Patent Attorney, Reg. No. 44,294 Zies, Widerman & Malek E-mail | Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn Posted: Jul 20, 2011 @ 1:27 pm 
|
|
Yesterday Ocean Tomo released the results of its Patent Quality Benchmark Study. The Patent Quality Study is intended to provide a benchmark for those studying patent quality across the 430 United States Patent Classes as defined by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The Study was conducted using the Ocean Tomo PatentRatings® system, which is a software platform for objectively assessing patent quality, relative value and competitive trends for patents, patent portfolios, companies, and technology sectors. The Ocean Tomo PatentRatings® System itself is a patented method, covered by U.S. Patent Nos. 6,556,992, 7,657,476 and 7,716,226, as well as various other pending patent applications.
The Study reflects Nanotechnology (class 977) as the number one technology class for patent quality, with the highest current average IPQ® score, which is an objective rating of patent assets based on a statistical methodology. Class 977 received an IPQ® score of 126.5. A median score is 100.
According to the Ocean Tomo the top 25 patent classes in terms of patent quality are:
- 977 Nanotechnology – IPQ 126.5
- 607 Surgery: light, thermal, and electrical application – IPQ 126.3
- 365 Static information storage and retrieval – IPQ 126.1
- 178 Telegraphy – IPQ 124.6
- 326 Electronic digital logic circuitry – IPQ 122.8
- 725 Interactive video distribution systems – IPQ 122.7
- 438 Semiconductor device manufacturing: process – IPQ 121.9
- 347 Incremental printing of symbolic information – IPQ 121.4
- 623 Prosthesis, parts thereof, or aids and accessories – IPQ 119.9
- 606 Surgery – IPQ 118.8
- 711 Electrical computers and digital processing systems: memory – IPQ 118.7
- 358 Facsimile and static presentation processing – IPQ 118.4
- 712 Electrical computers and digital processing systems – IPQ 118.3
- 51 Abrasive tool making process, material, or composition – IPQ 118.3
- 463 Amusement devices: games – IPQ 118.1
- 257 Active solid-state devices (e.g., transistors, solid-state diodes) – IPQ 118.0
- 399 Electrophotography – IPQ 117.9
- 380 Cryptography – IPQ 117.4
- 713 Electrical computers & digital processing: support – IPQ 117.3
- 710 Electrical computers & digital data processing: input/output – IPQ 116.9
- 705 Data processing: financial, business practice, management – IPQ 116.6
- 704 Data processing: speech processing, linguistics, audio compression – IPQ 116.6
- 507 Earth boring, well treating, and oil field chemistry – IPQ 116.3
- 709 Electrical computers & digital processing: multicomputer data transfer – IPQ 116.3
- 382 Image analysis – IPQ 115.6
Those interested in obtaining a complete copy of the Patent Quality Study can contact Ocean Tomo by e-mail. According to the Ocean Tomo website, those requesting a copy of the report will be deemed to have agreed to the Ocean Tomo Terms & Conditions, so you probably want to make sure you take a look at those before you request the full Study.
About the Author
 |
Eugene R. Quinn, Jr.
President & Founder of IPWatchdog, Inc. US Patent Attorney (Reg. No. 44,294) Zies, Widerman & Malek B.S. in Electrical Engineering, Rutgers University J.D., Franklin Pierce Law Center L.L.M. in Intellectual Property, Franklin Pierce Law Center Send me an e-mail  |
Gene Quinn is a US Patent Attorney, law professor and the founder of IPWatchdog.com. He is also a principal lecturer in the top patent bar review course in the nation, which helps aspiring patent attorneys and patent agents prepare themselves to pass the patent bar exam. Known by many as “The IPWatchdog,” Gene started the widely popular intellectual property website IPWatchdog.com in 1999, and since that time the site has had millions of unique visitors. Gene has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN Money, NPR and various other newspapers and magazines worldwide. He represents individuals, small businesses and start-up corporations. As an electrical engineer with a computer engineering focus his specialty is electronic and computer devices, Internet applications, software and business methods.
Related posts (automatically generated):
- Energy Efficient Apple Device Provides Enhanced Copyright Protection for Digital Music
Last week a patent application on an energy efficient device that provides enhanced copyright protections was published, not surprisingly with Apple, Inc. as the assignee. On Thursday, February 4, 2010, US Patent Application 20100030928 published, titled Media processing method and device. Certainly not the most sexy title possible, but the... - Upcoming Events from the Social Network Calendar
Below is the current list of events posted on the IPWatchdog Social Network. Joining is free, and you can add your industry events for free as well. The plan is to periodically post an upcoming list of events on the IPWatchdog.com blog taken from the current list over on the... - FTC to Hold Final Hearing on Patent Law
The fact that the FTC is uncomfortable with patent trolls, or non-practicing entities as is now the accepted term, does not mean that the government should launch an investigation to help those tech-giants who can't figure out how to combat trolling. First, we need to keep in mind that whatever... - USPTO Announces New Patent Examination Quality Initiative
The new procedures measure seven diverse aspects of the examination process to form a more comprehensive composite quality metric. The composite quality metric is designed to reveal the presence of quality issues arising during examination, and to aid in identification of their sources so that problems may be remediated by... - USPTO to Host Roundtable on Three-Track Patent Proposal
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will be holding a public roundtable discussion on its proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative, also known as “Three-Track,” currently under consideration by the USPTO. The purpose of the roundtable meeting is to solicit opinions from the public on the proposed initiative.... - USPTO to Conduct Studies of Prior User Rights and International Patent Protection for Small Businesses per America Invents Act
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released two Federal Register Notices on October 7, 2011, seeking written comments and announcing two public hearings for two studies the agency is required to conduct under the America Invents Act. Specifically, Congress is requiring the USPTO to study and report on... - EFS Warning! Patent Office Not Ready for Java Update
Consider the title of this article a very mild way of stating my frustration with the Patent Office. Yesterday, as I was trying to file a simple document using the Patent Office’s Electronic System, I kept getting an authentication error when I was trying to log on. I could not...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Class 977 is merely a cross reference art collection:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/uspc977/defs977.htm
http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/biochempharm/crossref.htm
As noted by jimbotronix, it is curious that Ocean Tomo lists class 977 Nanotechnology as #1 for patent quality, yet Class 977 is a cross-reference class that only takes discretionary classifications. Note 1 in the Class 977 definition states “(1)Note. It should be noted that this is a cross-reference collection of art only and will not, therefore, take for original placement any U.S. Patent.”
It would appear that this is a “study” of patent quality using proprietary methods by folks that don’t understand classification. Buyer beware.
Proper classification of applications and subsequent patents is key to determining their quality. Yes, the app & patent need to meet many requirements as specified in patent laws & regs, and as interpreted by the courts. However, failure to properly classify means that the invention will not be examined by the art unit that is expert in the primary subject matter, and leads to the very high likelihood that it will not be examined against the relevant prior art. Without correct classifications, objective measures of patent quality mean nothing. This is a continuing problem for USPTO, and is notable among business methods patents and others on the Ocean Tomo list.
I agree with patent analyst that classification is the first step in obtaining a quality patent. Unfortunately, the Office has let proper classification slip away. Currently, even if an application is properly classified, COPA is forcing examiners to examine applications in art areas they are not at all familiar with which inevitably will result in an increasing number of invalid patents.