About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs


  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« NVCA Reports Modest Gains in First Quarter Venture Funding | Main | The More the Merrier: The Journal Joins the Times in Complaining about Patents »

April 20, 2011



Do any of these statistics take into accounnt the EP's draconian file now or never rule for divisionals? How may extra patents were filed last fall as a result, and what affect would these numbers have on the EPO's supposedly record setting year.


Excellent question.

The EPO’s report does not mention the change in EP law regarding the filing of divisional applications or any impact that the change in the law had. The statistics reported by the EPO were aggregate numbers that simply reported the total number of applications filed by year and in certain technology fields. It seems to me that the change in the law would have a significant short term impact as applicants rushed to file their divisional applications. As I recall, this was even predicted by the EPO and/or various commentators. I anticipate that the number of filings will decrease in the future now that the new law has taken effect. Thanks for the question.

You write that all the top filers are electronics companies but that the third heaviest filer is BASF. I thought BASF was more chemical than electronics. Otherwise, I can confirm that a very large number of divisionals were indeed filed at the EPO in the weeks before the inextensible cut-off date of October 1, 2010

You are correct about BASF; they are a chemical company. Good catch.

And, I am interested in your comment "I can confirm that a very large number of divisionals" were filed before the October 1, 2010, deadline.
I am sure that you are correct, I just wonder about the source of your information. Do you work for the EPO?

Thanks for reading and for the comment.

Brad Crawford

The comments to this entry are closed.

July 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31