IP-related statistics from the recent past

A selection of key IP facts and figures, as reported by IAM and other sources

Table 1. Stock performance of selected publicly traded IP-centric companies, January-March 2015

Source: Google Finance

Tables 2a and 2b show the entities with the highest volume of in-bound patent assignment transactions (assignee table) and out-bound patent assignment transactions (assignor table), as recorded at the USPTO. These results are calculated by aggregating the number of transactions completed by an assignee/assignor in January and February 2015.

One transaction may include multiple patents, patent families and patent portfolios. Many companies create numerous holding vehicles to house their different IP portfolios; this is why similar company names may appear multiple times in the tables.

Table 2a. Top 30 patent assignees by number of transactions, January-February 2015

#	Assignee entity	Number of assignments transacted
1	National Institutes Of Health (NIH), U.S. Dept. Of Health And Human Services (DHHS), U.S. Government	205
2	National Science Foundation	134
3	eBay Inc.	124
4	Canon Kabushiki Kaisha	77
5	International Business Machines Corporation	74
6	Dow Global Technologies LLC	61
7	Intel Corporation	55
8	Inventor Holdings, LLC	53
9	Sony Corporation	52
10	Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd.	48
11	InnerCool Therapies, Inc.	47
12	Globus Medical, Inc.	41
13	U.S. Department Of Energy	40
14	Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.	38
15	Rovi Guides, Inc.	38
16	The Regents Of The University Of California	37
17	Qualcomm Incorporated	35
18	Google Inc.	34
19	Xerox Corporation	33
20	Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha	33
21	Microsoft Corporation	33
22	Apple Inc.	32
23	IGT	31
24	TV Guide, Inc.	30
25	CenturyLink Intellectual Property LLC	30
26	UV Corp.	29
27	Sarcos LC	29
28	Novartis AG	29
29	Veolia Water Technologies, Inc.	28
30	Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha	28

Source: ktMINE (www.ktmine.com)

Table 2b. Top 30 patent assignors by number of transactions, January-February 2015

#	Assignor entity	Number of assignments transacted
1	Searete LLC	25
2	Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd.	24
3	Sharp Laboratories Of America, Inc.	22
4	Marathon Patent Group, Inc.	19
5	Toyota Motor Engineering & Manufacturing North America, Inc.	18
6	Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.	17
7	Meso Scale Technologies, LLC.	15
8	Emcore Corporation	14
9	Sony Computer Entertainment Inc.	11
10	Scienbizip Consulting (Shenzhen) Co.,Ltd.	11
11	Meso Scale Technologies, LLC	10
12	Papa, Steven Paul	9
13	Novartis AG	9
14	Mishra, Rajesh Kumar	9
15	Bank Of America, N.A.	9
16	Weiman, Mark	8
17	Scheidl, Stefan	8
18	Reichenberger, Klaus	8
19	Momentive Specialty Chemicals Inc.	8
20	Licht, Nico	8
21	Heimann, Archim	8
22	Crocker, James P	8
23	Brand, Stephan	8
24	University Of Utah	7
25	Schaeffler Technologies GmbH & Co. KG	7
26	Nokia Corporation	7
27	Neumann, Michael	7
28	Cox, Isaiah W.	7
29	University Of California San Diego	6
30	Teggatz, Ross E.	6

Source: ktMINE (www.ktmine.com)

Table 3 lists all of the US Supreme Court cases relating to patent matters decided since January 2005 and ranks them according to the number of times they have subsequently been cited in US litigation.

Table 3. US Supreme Court patent-related decisions 2005-2015, ranked by number of citations

#	Case	Year	Issue concerned
1	KSR International Co v Teleflex Inc, 550 US 398	2007	Obviousness
2	eBay Inc v MercExchange, LLC, 547 US 388	2006	Injunctive relief
3	MedImmune, Inc v Genentech, Inc, 549 US 118	2007	Licensee's right to challenge licensed patents
4	Global-Tech Appliances, Inc v SEB SA, 131 S Ct 2060	2011	Induced infringement
5	Bilski v Kappos, 561 US 593	2010	Subject-matter eligibility (business methods)
6	Microsoft Corp v i4i Ltd Partnership, 131 S Ct 2238	2011	Presumption of validity
7	Illinois Tool Works Inc v Independent Ink, Inc, 547 US 28	2006	'Tying' arrangements in patent licences
8	Quanta Computer, Inc v LG Electronics, Inc, 553 US 617	2008	Exhaustion
9	Microsoft Corp v AT & T Corp, 550 US 437	2007	Infringement by export of components
10	Unitherm Food Systems, Inc v Swift-Eckrich, Inc, 546 US 394	2006	Post-verdict civil procedure requirements
11	Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc, 132 S Ct 1289	2012	Subject-matter eligibility (diagnostic methods)
12	Carlsbad Technology, Inc v HIF Bio, Inc, 556 US 635	2009	Appellate jurisdiction
13	Merck KGaA v Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd, 545 US 193	2005	Research exception to infringement
14	FTC v Actavis, Inc, 133 S Ct 2223	2013	Reverse payment ('pay-for-delay') settlements
15	Gunn v Minton, 133 S Ct 1059	2013	Federal jurisdiction over cases relating to, but not directly involving, patents
16	Lexmark Intern, Inc v Static Control Components, Inc, 134 S Ct 1377	2014	Unfair competition based on false infringement allegations
17	Nautilus, Inc v Biosig Instruments, Inc, 134 S Ct 2120	2014	Indefiniteness
18	Already, LLC v Nike, Inc, 133 S Ct 721	2013	Standing after covenant not to sue
19	Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University v Roche Molecular Systems, Inc, 131 S Ct 2188	2011	Patent ownership under the Bayh-Dole Act
20	Association for Molecular Pathology v Myriad Genetics, Inc, 133 S Ct 2107	2013	Subject-matter eligibility (isolated genetic material)
21	Alice Corp Pty Ltd v CLS Bank Intern, 134 S Ct 2347	2014	Subject-matter eligibility (computer-implemented inventions)
22	Limelight Networks, Inc v Akamai Technologies, Inc, 134 S Ct 2111	2014	Divided infringement
23	Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd v Novo Nordisk A/S, 132 S Ct 1670	2012	Forcing correction of patented drug 'use codes' in the US Food & Drug Administration's Orange Book

Source: Patently-O

IP-related statistics from the recent past

Related Topics