Law School Updates Patent Dispute Resolution Survey

By Gene Quinn
March 7, 2009

The Alternative Patent Dispute Resolution Project (“APDRP”) at Thomas Jefferson School of Law (“TJSL”) in San Diego, California is conducting an on-line survey of lawyers, judges, clerks and scholars such as you to gauge the industry’s perception of some fairly recent proposals to improve the current Federal patent adjudicative process in the United States and to encourage the use of alternatives thereto such as mediation and arbitration.  This survey seeks to provide an update to a previous survey I personally conducted while at Franklin Pierce Law Center and writing my thesis that was then a requirement for obtaining an LL.M. in Intellectual Property Law.  My original work entitled Using Alternative Dispute Resolution to Resolve Patent Litigation: A Survey of Patent Litigators, was published in the Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review in 1999.

The results of the survey will be made available to anyone who requests a copy, and the results will be analyzed, published by the APDRP in a law review article, and then discussed by the group at the Patent Dispute Resolution: Improving Patent Adjudication Through ADR and Court Reform symposium to be held on April 3, 2009 in San Diego, CA.  The APDRP would also like to present the results of the survey to members of the U.S. Congress and the judiciary to assist them in their efforts to improve the Federal patent adjudication process.

I have been invited to participate in this symposium and will be attending and speaking at the event about my original study and article.  I am happy to see that my original work has inspired this follow-up project.  I had long believed that it would be interesting to see what might have changed over the last 11 years since I conducted the original survey, and I am honored that APDRP at Thomas Jefferson has decided to further investigate this important aspect of litigation practice.

Of course, the survey and results will only be meaningful if enough people participate, so I would like to ask anyone involved in patent litigation and/or dispute resolution to please take about 10 minutes to answer the questions that make-up the on-line survey.  The survey consists of sixty-four questions and should take approximately ten minutes to complete. I realize that your time is valuable, but I encourage you to participate in the survey to help the APDRP improve the patent adjudicative process.  As an inducement to take the survey, TJSL will be having a drawing to provide two free entrance tickets to the symposium to one winner and will be providing commemorative TJSL shirts to two additional participants. If you would like to be eligible for these prizes, please either respond to this e-mail or request the results of the survey via Question #64.

Thank you in advance for your interest.


About the Author

Eugene R. Quinn, Jr.
President & Founder of IPWatchdog, Inc.
US Patent Attorney (Reg. No. 44,294)

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
View Gene Quinn's profile on LinkedIn

Gene is a US Patent Attorney, Law Professor and the founder of IPWatchdog.com. He teaches patent bar review courses and is a member of the Board of Directors of the United Inventors Association. Gene has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN Money and various other newspapers and magazines worldwide

The Author

Gene Quinn

Gene Quinn is a Patent Attorney and Editor and President & CEO ofIPWatchdog, Inc.. Gene founded IPWatchdog.com in 1999. Gene is also a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review Course and Of Counsel to the law firm of Berenato & White, LLC. Gene’s specialty is in the area of strategic patent consulting, patent application drafting and patent prosecution. He consults with attorneys facing peculiar procedural issues at the Patent Office, advises investors and executives on patent law changes and pending litigation matters, and works with start-up businesses throughout the United States and around the world, primarily dealing with software and computer related innovations. is admitted to practice law in New Hampshire, is a Registered Patent Attorney and is also admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. CLICK HERE to send Gene a message.

Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com. Read more.

Discuss this

There are currently 1 Comment comments.

  1. Ronald J Riley March 7, 2009 1:46 pm

    I have plenty of reason to believe that under the best of conditions that arbitration splits the baby and often the arbitrator becomes the long arm of less then reputable companies. In fact, the state of California recently sued over arbitrators rubber stamping business positions. Explain to me why Alternative Patent Dispute Resolution would not be more of the same.

    Ronald J. Riley