Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Patent examination at the State Intellectual Property Office in China

Contents:

Author Info

  • Johannes Liegsalz

    (BMW AG)

  • Stefan Wagner

    (ESMT European School of Management and Technology)

Abstract

The number of patent applications filed at the Chinese State Intellectual Property Office SIPO grew tremendously over the last decades and the SIPO has become the world’s third largest patent office by 2009. In this paper, we provide an overview of the institutional background of patent examination in China. Moreover, we empirically analyze the determinants of the grant lags applicants have to expect at the SIPO. The multivariate duration analysis is based on the population of 443,533 patent applications filed at the SIPO between 1990 and 2002. The average grant lag is 4.71 years with considerable variation across 30 different technology areas. Interestingly, we find that Chinese applicants are able to achieve faster patent grants than their non-Chinese counterparts (even after controlling for various other determinants of grant lags). This might be an indication of a differential treatment of Chinese applicants which would be in violation of Art. 3 (National Treatment) and Art. 4 (Most-favored Nation Treatment) of TRIPS that has been signed by China in 2001.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://static.esmt.org/publications/workingpapers/ESMT-11-06.pdf
File Function: First version, 2011
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by ESMT European School of Management and Technology in its series ESMT Research Working Papers with number ESMT-11-06.

as in new window
Length: 39 pages
Date of creation: 31 May 2011
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Research Policy 42(2): 552–563
Handle: RePEc:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-06

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schlossplatz 1, 10178 Berlin
Phone: +49 (0)30 21231 0
Fax: +49 (0)30 21231 9
Email:
Web page: http://www.esmt.org
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: patent system; patent examination; State Intellectual Property Office China; duration analysis;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Harhoff, Dietmar & Wagner, Stefan, 2006. "Modeling the Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 1256, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
  2. Daniel K.N. Johnson & David Popp, 2001. "Forced Out of the Closet: The Impact of the American Inventors Protection Act on the Timing of Patent Disclosure," NBER Working Papers 8374, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Yang, Deli, 2008. "Pendency and grant ratios of invention patents: A comparative study of the US and China," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1035-1046, July.
  4. Wipo, 2009. "World Intellectual Property Indicators, 2009 edition," WIPO Economics & Statistics Series, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division, number 2009:941, April.
  5. Harhoff, Dietmar & Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants--the case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 443-480, April.
  6. P. Regibeau & K. Rockett, 2003. "Are More Important Patents Approved More Slowly and Should They Be?," Economics Discussion Papers 556, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
  7. Bosworth, Derek & Yang, Deli, 2000. "Intellectual property law, technology flow and licensing opportunities in the People's Republic of China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 453-477, August.
  8. Lee Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley & Kamal Saggi, 2007. "Intellectual Property Rights, Imitation, and Foreign Direct Investment: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 13033, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  10. van Zeebroeck, Nicolas & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno & Guellec, Dominique, 2009. "Claiming more: the Increased Voluminosity of Patent Applications and its Determinants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1006-1020, July.
  11. Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 1998. "Technological enclaves and industrial districts: An analysis of the regional distribution of innovative activity in Europe," ERSA conference papers ersa98p461, European Regional Science Association.
  12. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2007. "The Impact of Uncertain Intellectual Property Rights on the Market For Ideas: Evidence From Patent Grant Delays," NBER Working Papers 13234, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Smith, Pamela J., 1999. "Are weak patent rights a barrier to U.S. exports?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 151-177, June.
  14. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
  15. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1987. "Is Western Europe losing the technological race?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 59-85, August.
  16. John Cantwell & Simona Iammarino, 2000. "Multinational Corporations and the Location of Technological Innovation in the UK Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 317-332.
  17. Dietmar Harhoff & Stefan Wagner, 2009. "The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1969-1984, December.
  18. Braga, C.A.P. & Fink, C. & Sepulveda, C.P., 2000. "Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Development," World Bank - Discussion Papers 412, World Bank.
  19. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2003. "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1343-1363, September.
  20. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  21. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
  22. Masaaki Kotabe, 1992. "A Comparative Study of U.S. and Japanese Patent Systems," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 147-168, March.
  23. David Popp & Ted Juhl & Daniel K.N. Johnson, 2003. "Time in Purgatory: Determinants of the Grant Lag for U.S. Patent Applications," NBER Working Papers 9518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Yamauchi, Isamu & Nagaoka, Sadao, 2013. "Does the outsourcing of prior art search increase the efficiency of patent examination?," IIR Working Paper 13-12, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
  2. Joseph Mai & Andrey Stoyanov, 2014. "Home Country Bias in the Legal System: Empirical Evidence from the Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Canada," Working Papers 2014_3, York University, Department of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:esm:wpaper:esmt-11-06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ESMT Faculty Publications).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.