Abstract
This paper considers patent granting as a two-tiered process, which consists of patent office examination (public enforcement) and court challenges (private enforcement). It argues that, when the patent-holder has private information about the patent validity, (i) a weak patent is more likely to be settled and thus escape court challenges than a strong patent; and (ii) when the economy is suffered from low patent quality problem, a tighter examination by the patent office may strengthen private scrutiny over a weak patent. Both work against Lemley (2001)’s hypothesis of a “rationally ignorant” patent office. The paper also considers other policy instruments. It shows that (i) application fees, used as a tool to deter opportunistic patenting, may crowd out private enforcement but cannot replace public enforcement; and (ii) the usefulness of a pre-grant challenge procedure is subject to several restrictions, including the private challenger’s timing
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
