IPR’s key to reject bad patents.
Love et al. 2-3-2019. [Brian J., Co-Director, High Tech Law Institute, School of Law, Santa Clara University; Shawn P. Miller, Professor in Residence, School of Law, University of San Diego; Shawn Ambwani Co-Founder, Unified Patents; “Determinants of Patent Quality: Evidence from Inter Partes Review Proceedings,” 90 U. Colo. L. Rev. 67, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3119871 //cpsw-ay]
In addition to advancing the literature on patent quality, our findings have importance for ongoing policy debates. As described in detail infra in Section II.D.3, the continued existence of administrative patent challenges in the United States is uncertain. In both Congress and the courts, opponents of post-grant administrative review have sought to weaken or altogether eliminate existing procedures. At the core of this policy debate is a dispute about whether, on balance, administrative review of issued patents helps or harms innovation. Our results suggest that inter partes review is, on average, eliminating patents with characteristics traditionally associated with "weakness" and, thus, are consistent with arguments that the procedure is functioning as originally intended.