Factors Analysis on Period of Patent Substantive Examination
Wen Jiachun1,Lu Bingke2
1.Law School/ Intellectual Property School,Tongji University,Shanghai 200092,China; 2.School of Management,Huazhong University of Science and Technology,Wuhan 430074,China
Abstract：The paper analyzed the micro factors which affect the period of patent substantive examination from the features of the patent application itself.It selected patent family randomly which applied in China,the United States and Japan from 2001 to 2010 as the sample.It constructed two-level model to analyze the correlation between the technical field,the characteristics of applicants,the features of patent document and the period of patent substantive examination.The results show that patent substantive examination period related closely not only with the technical field,but also with the applicant's nationality,the number of claims,the number of references,the type of applications.The research results can provide a reference for improving the system of patent applications,using patent examination of policy tools reasonably,and sounding examiner training system to improve the efficiency of the substantive examination.On the other hand,the results can provide guidance on how to be authorized faster
[1]世界知识产权组织.统计数据.世界知识产权指标2015年版[R/OL].(2015-12-14)[2015-12-20].http://www.wipo.int/ipstats/zh/wipi/. [2]中国国家知识产权局.统计信息.世界五大知识产权局年度统计报告[R/OL].(2015-09-01)[2015-12-11].http://www.sipo.gov.cn/tjxx/wjndbg/201509/t20150901_1169018.html. [3]文家春.专利审查行为对技术创新的影响机理研究[J].科学学研究,2012(6):848-855. [4]RGIBEAU P,ROCKETT K.Are more important patents approved more slowly and should they be?[J].Cepr discussion papers,2003(6):1-29. [5]XIE Y,GILES D.A survival analysis of the approval of U.S.patent applications[J].Applied economics,2011,43(11):1375-1384. [6]ZEEBROECK N V.Patents only live twice:a patent survival analysis of the determinants of examination lags,grant decisions,and renewals[D].Bruxelles:Université Libre de Bruxelles. [7]PAUL H J,ALFONS P,ELIZABETH W.Application pendency times and outcomes across four patent offices[R].Melbourne institute working paper,2008,No.01/08. [8]徐伟杰.试论我国专利审查程序的优化[D].北京:中国政法大学,2010. [9]文家春.专利授权时滞的延长风险及其效应分析[J].科研管理,2012,05(33):139-145. [10]RGIBEAU P,ROCKETT K.Innovation cycles and learning at the patent office:Does the early patent get the delay[J].The journal of industrial economics,2010(9):222-246. [11]BURK L B,LEMLEY M A.Is patent law technology specific?[J].Berkeley technology law journal,2002(4):338. [12]MARK Schankerman.How valuable is patent protection? Estimates by technology field[J].Rand journal of economics,1998,29(1):77-107. [13]LERNER J.150 years of patent office practice[J].American law and economics review,2005,7(1):112-143. [14]PALANGKARAYA A,JENSEN P H,WEBSTER E.Patent examination decisions and strategic trade behavior[J].Access & download statistics,2006,42(4):1347-1360. [15]LIEGSALZ J,WAGNER S.Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China[J].Research policy,2013(2):552-563. [16]BATABYAL A,DEANGELO G J.Average patent pendency and examination errors:a queuing theoretic analysis[J].International journal of foresight and innovation policy,2008,4(1-2):112-128. [17]CAILLAUD B,DUCHNE A.Patent Office in innovation policy:nobody's perfect[J].International journal of industrial organization,2011,29(2):242-252. [18]HARHOFF D,WAGNER S.Modelling the duration of patent examination at the European Patent Office[J].Social science electronic publishing,2005,55(12):1969-1984. [19]POPP D,TED J,DANIEL K N Johnson.Time in purgatory:determinants of the grant lag for US patent applications[J].Social science electronic publishing,2003,4(1):1-45. [20]杨珉.医学和公共卫生研究常用多水平统计模型[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2007:115-150.
2016, 
