IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Patent Pendency, Learning Effects, and Innovation Importance at the US Patent Office

  • Pierre Regibeau


  • Katharine Rockett


  • Samrawit Mariam

We replicate and extend the results of Regibeau and Rockett (2010) on a new data set. We confirm that importance of a patent and the delay in approval at the patent office are negatively related. This relation survives even if we do not control for learning effects and so suggests that carefully defining the technology is sufficient to recover the negative relation. We use new measures to test for the existence of patent �thickets�, thereby ruling out some strategic considerations in delay behaviour. It appears that delay is attributable to patent office, not filer, behaviour in our sample. A more careful analysis of the possible effect of examiner workload finds that larger workloads per examiner are associated with shorter approval time, lending credence to Lemley and Shapiro�s concern that heavy workloads force examiners to devote too little time to each patent review.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University of Essex, Department of Economics in its series Economics Discussion Papers with number 709.

in new window

Date of creation: 01 Mar 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:esx:essedp:709
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Wivenhoe Park, COLCHESTER. CO4 3SQ

Phone: +44-1206-872728
Fax: +44-1206-872724
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Postal: Discussion Papers Administrator, Department of Economics, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ, U.K.

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:esx:essedp:709. 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: (Essex Economics Web Manager)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.