IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2013

Life Sciences Top 49

By Donald Zuhn --

Last month, the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) announced the release of its 31st annual list of the top 300 organizations receiving U.S. patents.  Patent Docs Readers may recall that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office stopped releasing its annual list of top patent recipients in 2006 in order to "discourag[e] any perception that we believe more is better."

The IPO compiled its list by counting the number of utility patents granted during 2013 that listed an organization or a subsidiary as the owner on the printed patent.  The IPO notes that if an assignment to an organization or its subsidiary was recorded after the patent was printed, the patent was not counted, and further, that patents that were granted to two or more organizations jointly were attributed to the organization listed first on the patent.  The IPO also noted that 277,835 patents were issued in 2013, which was an increase from the 253,155 patents that issued in 2012.  The top fifteen companies on the IPO Top 300 are listed below (click on table to expand):

Falling out of the Top 15 in 2013 were Seiko Epson Corp. and Toyota Jidosha K.K., which dropped to 19th and 22nd, respectively.  Replacing those companies in the Top 15 were Google, Inc. and Apple, Inc.

As in past years, Patent Docs used the IPO's list of top patent holders to compile a list of the top "life sciences" companies and organizations receiving U.S. patents in 2013.  In the past seven years, the number of life sciences companies and organizations making the list has gone from 51 in 2006 to 47 in 2007, 43 in 2008, 47 in 2009, 56 in 2010, 53 in 2011, 50 in 2012, and 49 last year.  Each organization's IPO top 300 ranking for 2013 is indicated in the "2013 IPO Rank" column; the IPO top 300 ranking for 2012 (if available) is indicated in the "2012 IPO Rank" column; and the change in number of patents from 2012 is indicated in "+/- from 2012."  The Life Sciences Top 49 is listed below (click on table to expand):

Life sciences companies and organizations that failed to make the IPO top 300 in 2013 after making it in 2012 included Dongbu Hitek Co., Ltd. (#224 on the IPO top 300 for 2012), DSM IP Assets B.V. (273), AstraZeneca AB (288), and Toray Industries Inc. (296).  Life sciences companies new to this year's list are indicated in green text.

Please note that some of the companies and organizations listed above may be involved in work outside the life sciences sector, and therefore, a portion of the patents granted to these companies and organizations may be directed to other than life sciences-related inventions.  In addition, our list is a little inclusive in that we included medical device companies.

For additional information regarding this topic, please see:

• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2012," June 24, 2013
• "Another Look at IPO Top 300 and Life Sciences Top 53," June 11, 2012
• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2011," June 7, 2012
• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2010," June 30, 2011
• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2009," May 26, 2010
• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders for 2008," May 14, 2009
• "IPO Releases List of Top 300 Patent Holders," May 22, 2008
• "IPO Posts List of Top 300 Patent Holders," April 20, 2007

Comments

[Invention Management]

This also indicates that the Technology giants like Google, Apple are adding patents and demonstrating a huge percentage change every year to this Top 300 list.

[MaxDrei]

That medical device patents are included presumably explains a top 5 that includes Boston Sci, Medtronic and Covidien.

Easy then, isn't it, to see which newly created fused entity next year will top the List, by a huge margin.

[Skeptical]

To the extent that medical devices, or rather, the innovations in medical devices tend to be predominantly of the software type, and looking at the gross numbers, an order of magnitude difference is immediately perceptible.

Is this why certain large software influences are able to control "the wag" from their flea-like vantage point at the tip of the tail? Can any reforms (or appointments) make their way through today's political jungle without suffering the diseases brought on by flea bites?

Alas, I remain....