EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Death squad or quality improvement? The impact of introducing post-grant review on U.S. patent legal quality

Arianna Martinelli and Julia Mazzei

Research Policy, 2025, vol. 54, issue 5

Abstract: We investigate how the introduction of post-grant reviews at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office through the America Invents Act (AIA) has influenced the behavior of patent applicants and examiners. This reform may incentivize applicants to narrow the scope of their patents, thereby reducing the risk of post-grant reviews and enhancing patent legal quality. To test this hypothesis, we employ a standard Difference-in-Differences (DID) analysis and find that applicants are more likely to narrow the scope of their patents. This change has resulted in fewer challenges to U.S. patents, yielding estimated annual savings of 62 to 148 million. When applicants do not preemptively narrow the scope during filing, we observe tougher scrutiny during the examination process, as examiners effectively compensate for the applicant’s lack of action. However, this “disciplinary effect” of narrowing patent scope is absent in complex fields characterized by patent thickets, where the reform does not lead to significant improvements in U.S. patent legal quality.

Keywords: Patent scope; Post-grant reviews; Policy evaluation; America Invents Act (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: K0 O34 O38 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733325000344
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:5:s0048733325000344

DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2025.105205

Access Statistics for this article

Research Policy is currently edited by Anna Bergek, PhD, Alex Coad, PhD, Maryann Feldman, Elisa Giuliani, Adam B. Jaffe, Martin Kenney, Keun Lee, PhD, Ben Martin, MA, MSc, Kazuyuki Motohashi, Paul Nightingale, Ammon Salter, Maria Savona, Reinhilde Veugelers and John Walsh

More articles in Research Policy from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().

 
Page updated 2025-06-14
Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:5:s0048733325000344