Time In Purgatory: Examining the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications
| LEADER | caa a22 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 378898744 | ||
| 003 | CHVBK | ||
| 005 | 20180305123512.0 | ||
| 007 | cr unu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 161128e20041104xx s 000 0 eng | ||
| 024 | 7 | 0 | |a 10.2202/1538-0653.1329 |2 doi |
| 035 | |a (NATIONALLICENCE)gruyter-10.2202/1538-0653.1329 | ||
| 245 | 0 | 0 | |a Time In Purgatory: Examining the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications |h [Elektronische Daten] |c [David Popp, Ted Juhl, Daniel K.N. Johnson] |
| 520 | 3 | |a As patent applications increase, and the range of patentable technologies increases, the length of time it takes for an invention to go through the examination process at the U.S. Patent Office has increased. Concerns over the distributional effects of these changes have been expressed during policy debates. We use data on U.S. patent applications and grants to ask who is affected by longer grant lags. We augment this analysis with interviews of patent examiners, leading to a better understanding of the examination process. Our analysis finds that differences across technology are most important. These differences do not erode over time, suggesting that learning effects alone will not reduce grant lags. Inventor characteristics have statistically significant effects, but the magnitudes are small. | |
| 540 | |a ©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston | ||
| 690 | 7 | |a patents |2 nationallicence | |
| 690 | 7 | |a examinations |2 nationallicence | |
| 690 | 7 | |a grant lags |2 nationallicence | |
| 690 | 7 | |a USPTO |2 nationallicence | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Popp |D David |u Syracuse University, dcpopp@maxwell.syr.edu |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Juhl |D Ted |u University of Kansas, juhl@ku.edu |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Johnson |D Daniel K.N. |u Colorado College, djohnson@coloradocollege.edu |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | |t Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy |d De Gruyter |g 4/1(2004-11-04) |q 4:1 |1 2004 |2 4 |o bejeap | |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.2202/1538-0653.1329 |q text/html |z Onlinezugriff via DOI |
| 908 | |D 1 |a research article |2 jats | ||
| 950 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |P 856 |E 40 |u https://doi.org/10.2202/1538-0653.1329 |q text/html |z Onlinezugriff via DOI | ||
| 950 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |P 700 |E 1- |a Popp |D David |u Syracuse University, dcpopp@maxwell.syr.edu |4 aut | ||
| 950 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |P 700 |E 1- |a Juhl |D Ted |u University of Kansas, juhl@ku.edu |4 aut | ||
| 950 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |P 700 |E 1- |a Johnson |D Daniel K.N. |u Colorado College, djohnson@coloradocollege.edu |4 aut | ||
| 950 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |P 773 |E 0- |t Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy |d De Gruyter |g 4/1(2004-11-04) |q 4:1 |1 2004 |2 4 |o bejeap | ||
| 900 | 7 | |b CC0 |u http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0 |2 nationallicence | |
| 898 | |a BK010053 |b XK010053 |c XK010000 | ||
| 949 | |B NATIONALLICENCE |F NATIONALLICENCE |b NL-gruyter | ||