Monday, January 14, 2008

Patent Litigation Down? "Bollocks!" Says the Troll Tracker

While early reports are indicating that the number of patent cases have dipped slightly in 2007, the Patent Troll Tracker has done what few others have done, and has looked at patent litigation for 2007 according to the number of defendants named in complaints. Basically, the study looked at cases from PACER/ECF from the top jurisdictions between 2006-07, counted defendants, and extrapolated. Under this approach, over two-thirds of patent cases were taken into consideration.

The conclusion? According to the Patent Troll Tracker 2007 shows a 30% increase in patent litigation over 2006, fueled by a 40% increase in the Eastern District of Texas.

  • Comparing 2007 to 2006, nationwide there was a 4.6% increase in patent cases, but there was a 31.5% increase in the number of defendants sued for patent infringement.

  • Comparing 2007 to 2006 just for the Eastern District of Texas, there was a 37.9% increase in the number of patent cases, and there was a 40.8% increase in the number of defendants sued for patent infringement.

  • Comparing 2007 to 1990, nationwide there has been over a tripling in the number of patent cases (+221%), and a quintupling in the number of defendants sued for patent infringement (+404%).
For the top 7 jurisdictions for patent litigation, the numbers came out this way:
  • ED Texas: 364 patent cases, 1,402 defendants sued (151 troll cases)
  • CD California: 272 patent cases, 729 defendants sued (23 troll cases)
  • D New Jersey: 187 patent cases, 349 defendants sued (13 troll cases)
  • D Delaware: 147 patent cases, 350 defendants sued (18 troll cases)
  • ND Illinois: 137 patent cases, 261 defendants sued (26 troll cases)
  • ND California: 131 patent cases, 249 defendants sued (19 troll cases)
  • SD New York: 102 patent cases, 255 defendants sued (14 troll cases)
Notes the anonymous Troll Tracker: "I say pshaw to the notion that patent infringement increased only 4-6% in 2007. Look at the defendants sued: there was over a 30% increase this past year. That's the number that matters. Now where will 2008 fall?"

Read the full (and quite impressive) post here (link)

2 Comentários:

Anonymous said...

Justice delayed is justice denied. And Piracy Coalition members love to delay justice.

This is why both the Coalition for Patent fairness and PIRACY and the Troll Tracker hate the Marshal Texas court. It is a court which does not put up with the kind of abuse of process of law which patent pirates like to use to bankrupt inventors.

Frankly I think that the Troll Tracker is associated in some capacity with the Piracy Coalition, and that he-she-it is a stooge paid to pursue another angle attacking any inventor who has the gall to take patent pirating large companies to task for stealing, lying and cheating.

I think that most people crying about mythical trolls have larceny in their hearts, and that this is especially true of the Troll Tracker!


Ronald J. Riley,


Speaking only on my own behalf.
Affiliations:
President - www.PIAUSA.org - RJR at PIAUSA.org
Executive Director - www.InventorEd.org - RJR at InvEd.org
Senior Fellow - www.patentPolicy.org
President - Alliance for American Innovation
Caretaker of Intellectual Property Creators on behalf of deceased founder Paul Heckel
Washington, DC
Direct (202) 318-1595 - 9 am to 9 pm EST.

Anonymous said...

Ron,

Troll Tracker inadvertently mentioned in one of his essays that he would love to transfer some of his cases from Judge Sue Robinson (Federal Court of Delaware) to some other place...
Big mistake on his part !
Maybe you can help me to figure out his identity (and collect 10K bounty from Mr. Ray Niro)
There aren't too many patent cases assigned to Judge Sue Robinson
I believe that he is listed on one of those cases , probably filed agaist his big infringer client by some small patent holder (aka "patent troll" in his definition)
Anyway, I'd be happy for anyone who can expose that piece of trash and collect the bounty

Small Inventor (aka patent troll)

DISCLAIMER

This Blog/Web Site ("Blog") is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. Use of the Blog does not create any attorney-client relationship between you and Peter Zura or his firm. Persons requiring legal advice should contact a licensed attorney in your state. Any comment posted on the Blog can be read by any Blog visitor; do not post confidential or sensitive information. Any links from another site to the Blog are beyond the control of Peter Zura and does not convey his, or his past or present employer(s) approval, support, endorsement or any relationship to any site or organization.

The 271 Patent Blog © 2008. Template by Dicas Blogger.

TOPO