News & Views — Unified Patents

Sign up today to receive FREE daily patent litigation alerts!

Economics

Nearly $500 million in Economic Benefit From Fewer NHK-Fintiv Denials at the PTAB: Report

The Perryman Group, in a recent economic study commissioned by Unified Edge, has found that over the next 10 years, the total economic benefit of reducing discretionary denials of inter partes review proceedings under criteria such as the NHK-Fintiv rules will lead to an increase in US business activity of $482.1 million, $230.4 million in personal income, and approximately 2,000 job-years of employment.

Source: The Perryman Group

Conversely, any activity that would reinforce or ensconce those rules or other forms of discretionary denial edicts—i.e., a continuation of current practice—could cost the U.S. economy almost $500 million. 

The report, The Potential Economic Benefits of Recent Reductions in Discretionary Denial of Inter Partes Review Based on Criteria such as the NHK-Fintiv Rules (March 2023), was commissioned by Unified Edge in part to explore the as-yet unstudied economic impact the NHK-Fintiv criteria. It researches, organizes, and provides data-backed studies and evidence to further regulatory and policy goals, and works to keep the policymakers up to date and informed on ongoing policies, data, and the regulatory landscape to move the law forward in a just, reasoned, and evidence-based way.

Read the entire report HERE.

Expansion of AIA would have added $1.5 billion to GDP

In a new economic study, the Perryman Group has determined that enhancements to the America Invents Act’s post-grant review proceedings and increased use of district court stays would have saved the U.S. economy almost $1.5 billion dollars in gross domestic product (GDP), $712.7 million in personal income, and would have generated upwards of +6,792 job-years of employment between 2014 and 2019. That would have been in addition to the substantial savings realized of almost $3 billion already reported based on the current AIA regime. In other words, it could have been upwards of $4.5 billion of GDP savings, combined. This demonstrates that while the AIA has had a strong positive impact on the U.S. economy, it has fallen short of the benefits it could have accomplished with broader use of stays and a more comprehensive mandate. 

The study found that U.S. manufacturing would have experienced the greatest gains. It analyzed three scenarios: 1) If all court proceedings on a patent were automatically stayed after IPR was instituted, 2) if all invalidity defenses could be asserted in IPR proceedings, and 3) if both expansions had been in place. 

Screen Shot 2021-09-22 at 8.18.27 PM.png

For 1), automatic district court stays, the Report estimates those changes would have led to an increase in U.S. business activity of an additional $543.1 million in GDP, $259.6 million in personal income, and +2,474 job-years of employment.

For 2), adding all defenses to the process, it estimates that adding those defenses would have led to an estimated $731.3 million additional increase in gross product, $349.5 million in personal income, and +3,331 job-years of employment.

And for 3) both, including multiplier effects, it estimates additional savings of $1.49 billion in gross product, $712.7 million in personal income, and +6,792 job-years of employment, noting that the benefits associated with Scenario Three are greater than the sum of the prior two if implemented separately, as the additional proceedings allowed if all invalidity defenses could be asserted would also benefit from being universally stayed while the IPR process is ongoing. 

Screen Shot 2021-09-22 at 12.32.53 PM.png
Screen Shot 2021-09-22 at 8.20.38 PM.png

Unified Patent’s Patent Quality Initiative (PQI) previously commissioned a study that demonstrated the substantial financial impact passage of the America Invents Act, and in particular, challenges like inter partes review (IPR), have had on the U.S. economy. That study demonstrated that U.S. businesses and the economy as a whole saved upwards of $2.95 billion dollars in gross domestic product, $1.41 billion in personal income, and generated upwards of +13,500 job-years of employment between 2014 and 2019.  

That study relied on the current AIA regime of post-grant review, where district court stays are inconsistently applied, limited grounds of challenge are available, and in practice—given recalcitrance to stay, confusion in caselaw and regulatory requirements like discretionary denials, and some resulting duplication of efforts between fora—the Congressional goals of providing a true cost-effective alternative to inefficient district court litigation have fallen short. Further study was needed to determine how much could have been saved over the same time period had district courts automatically stayed cases or had more grounds of invalidity been available in IPR.

Indeed, innovation has long been recognized as the key factor supporting U.S. economic growth and competitiveness. A critical element of the infrastructure facilitating product development and commercialization is the system that protects intellectual property and encourages its widespread adoption and implementation. The current framework that facilitates this process includes the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The AIA and PTAB reduce the need for patent litigation, reducing costs and generating substantial economic benefits. Potential expansions of the AIA would lead to additional gains in business activity.

Economic performance in the United States over the long term is tied to innovation. The AIA and PTAB not only support innovation, but also generate substantial economic benefits. These benefits could be even greater with expansion of the AIA. 

The report is part of Unified Patents’ ongoing Patent Quality Initiative (PQI), an effort to gather and provide objective data and research demonstrating how lowering patent quality will inevitably lead to even higher cost and risk for U.S. SMEs, inventors, and manufacturers, and can lead to less innovation, fewer U.S. jobs, and a drain on the U.S. economy. Our PQI aims to provide data, studies, and testimonials to give policymakers and practitioners a clear picture of the state of the patent system. More information about our PQI efforts can be found here.

For far greater detail, read the entire report HERE.

Webinar Materials - 5G RAN Economics and Licensing

Speakers:

Craig Thompson — General Manager & COO, Unified Consulting

John Morgan — Head of Solutions & Deployments, Facebook Connectivity

During our webinar, we discussed 5G RAN characteristics and the market forces and economics of Open RAN. We highlighted several other areas like vRAN and C-RAN, and spoke on how each of the new technologies have changed the licensing landscape.

Thank you to Craig and John for leading a great discussion!

To listen to the recorded webinar, click here: https://vimeo.com/516850365

The slide presentation from this webinar can be seen below.

Our next webinar is scheduled for Thursday, March 25th. Visit our website for topic details and more information.

Economic PTAB Analysis Demonstrates Post-Grant Challenges Save Litigation Costs Regardless of Stay

Leading Economic Expert finds that PTAB challenges lower total costs and benefit the US Economy almost $2 billion regardless of whether litigation stays are granted

The Perryman Group, in a recent economic study commissioned by Unified, found substantial cost savings in district court cases when there is a copending IPR proceeding regardless of whether a stay is granted or not. 

The study found either outcome resulted in substantial benefits to the U.S. economy by improving business activity $1.87 billion and saving 8,530 job years.  That included where an IPR was conducted parallel to an ongoing district court proceeding, where the Perryman Group estimated the economic benefits of cost savings over the 2014-19 period of $135.4 million in US gross product and 617 person-years of employment. The study also found these benefits are primarily concentrated in the manufacturing sector.

Source: The Perryman Group

Source: The Perryman Group

Screen Shot 2021-02-16 at 8.35.10 PM.png

The full study is available here, and complements Perryman Group’s earlier work demonstrating the quantifiable economic benefits of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act’s post-grant proceedings in the years following their implementation.

Source: The Perryman Group

Source: The Perryman Group

The Perryman Report is part of Unified Patents’ Patent Quality Initiative (PQI), an effort to gather and provide objective data and research demonstrating how lowering patent quality will inevitably lead to even higher cost and risk for U.S. SMEs, inventors, and manufacturers, and can lead to less innovation, fewer U.S. jobs, and a drain on the U.S. economy. Our PQI aims to provide data, studies, and testimonials to give policymakers and practitioners a clear picture of the state of the patent system. More information about our PQI efforts can be found here.

For far greater detail, read the entire report HERE.

Copyright © 2021, Unified Patents, LLC. All rights reserved.

2020 First-Half Transport Zone Update: Litigation Doubles

Overview

As patent litigation continues to rise, the Transport Zone is expected to see an 105% increase by the end of 2020. At the halfway point of the year (78 cases), litigation has already reached last year high (76 cases). This means that based on current numbers litigation is expected to hit  150+ cases reaching near all-time highs in this zone.

Screen Shot 2020-07-15 at 3.50.56 PM.png

Transport manufacturers continue to be the main targets of litigation. These manufacturers comprise 89% of all first-named defendants. Manufacturers are defined as companies such as Toyota, Honda, Ford, and Tesla. Dealerships are defined as a company that primarily sells for the manufacturer. These would include Kinsel Ford and Zimbrick Honda. Suppliers are companies such as Bosch Automotive, ABB, and even Uber that provide components or services.

NPEs continue to bring the majority of the lawsuits against Transport manufacturers and suppliers. NPEs are responsible for almost 77% of all transport litigation.

Looking at the year-by-year trends, NPE litigation has doubled in the first half of the year since last year in the Transport Zone.

The top-five plaintiffs in 2020, four are prolific NPEs, continually attack this zone. Those four NPEs account for 37% (29 cases out of 78) of litigation brought this year alone. The top-five plaintiffs are:

  1. JG Technologies (NPE): 11

  2. Display Technologies (NPE): 9

  3. Noco Company (Operating Company): 6

  4. Omnitek Partners (NPE): 5

  5. 2BCOM (NPE): 4

The top-five defendants in 2020, all manufacturers account for 25% of first-named defendants. The manufacturers are:

  1. Tesla: 5

  2. Ford: 5

  3. BMW: 4

  4. Hyundai: 3

  5. Jaguar Land Rover: 2


METHODOLOGY

Unified looked at all major Transport manufacturers and the top 10 Transport suppliers by revenue since 2012.

Total number of reported cases can vary. Unified made its best attempt to eliminate mistaken or duplicative filings.

Statistics include litigations initiated by NPEs or Declaratory Judgments (DJs) initiated by operating companies against NPEs.

Unified strives to accurately identify NPE through all available means, such as court filings, public documents, and product documentation.

LEGEND

Non Practicing Entity (NPE) = Company which derives the majority of its total revenue from Patent Licensing activities.

Operating Company or Op. Co. = Company which derives most of its total revenue from Product Sales or Services. Could be an SME or a large company.

NPE (Patent Assertion Entities) = Entity whose primary activity is licensing patents and acquired most of its patents from another entity

NPE (Small Company) = Entity whose original activity was providing products and services, but now is primarily focused on monetizing its own patent portfolio.

NPE (Individual) = Entity owned or controlled by an individual inventor who is primarily focused on monetizing inventions patents by that individual inventor.

Copyright © 2020, Unified Patents, LLC. All rights reserved.