Office Action Comparisons
For the last 18 months, Rowan has been investigating various statistics related to patent prosecution. Looking predominantly at 112 rejections, we’ve examined results by entity size, industry, top filers, law firms and corporations.
This month, we thought it would be interesting to look at the prosecution history of a random sample of patent applications and compare that to applications drafted using our integrated drafting environment, Rowan Patents. By way of full disclosure, much of the usage of Rowan Patents has been in the last few years, so many of those applications have yet to be published. As a result, the sample size of patents that were drafted in Rowan Patents is relatively small compared to the random sample. We don’t intend to draw any definitive conclusions based on these results. Rather, we want to see if the data is trending in a direction that would support the hypothesis that using patent drafting software not only provides significant efficiencies but also can impact the quality of the resulting patents.
We started with investigating the percentage of applications that received a 112 rejection in their Office action, as these may be avoided with software that ensures consistency and reduces the chance of errors being introduced during the process of conveying complex information in both language and figures.
In the random sample, 37% of the Office actions contained at least one 112 rejection. In the set drafted using Rowan Patents, that dropped to 25%, a 32% decrease. Could we reduce the odds of all applications receiving a 112 rejection by 32% if every application was drafted using Rowan Patents? It is too early to tell for sure…but we will continue to monitor and report.