Here is a striking result from the Morgan Lewis invalidity study:
The waterfall of invalidity by lower court, fed circuit, CAFC findings, along with the new IPR (not shown in that document due to study ending in 2012) show a reasonably negotiable cascade of invalidity findings.
An ontology of patent claims could further help reduce the confusion and subjectivity of individuals in the process.
-Rich
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2015 11:55 AM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: [ontolog-forum] Patent Case Validity Statistics
For those ontologists interested in the language and concepts of patent claims, and in the results of court patent cases, here is a PDF with deep historic analysis of said patent case history. Here is a goldmine:
https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/Smyth_USPatentInvalidity_Sept12.pdf
The actual results were tabulated, organized and presented in that PDF. The amazing thing is how the category rankings have varied over the years, and how few patent claims are ultimately held to be valid at the end of the case, whether by judge or by jury.
This helps explain the economics of automating invalidity earlier in the process could greatly reduce the litigation costs for MOST patent cases.
-Rich
Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2