EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Patent examiner specialization

Cesare Righi and Timothy Simcoe

Research Policy, 2019, vol. 48, issue 1, 137-148

Abstract: We study the matching of patent applications to examiners at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The distribution of technology classes is more concentrated than would occur under random matching and F-tests reject the hypothesis that family size and claim scope are randomly distributed across examiners. Using the application text, we show that examiner specialization persists even after conditioning on technology sub-classes. Specialization is less pronounced in computers and software than other technology fields. More specialized examiners have a lower grant rate. These findings undermine the idea that random matching justifies instrumental variables based on examiner behaviors or characteristics.

Keywords: Patent; Technology classes; Specialization (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1) Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318301902
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:48:y:2019:i:1:p:137-148

Access Statistics for this article

Research Policy is currently edited by M. Bell, B. Martin, W.E. Steinmueller, A. Arora, M. Callon, M. Kenney, S. Kuhlmann, Keun Lee and F. Murray

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

 
Page updated 2019-05-25
Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:1:p:137-148