In plain words
For UNIVERSITE MONTPELLIER 2 SCIENCES ET TECHNIQUES, 33% of applications were allowed within three years of the first office action, against 72% for the USPTO. An allowance took 1.8 rejections on average, against 1.6 for the USPTO. The first action takes 19.9 months on average.
Where it stands
Every one with thirty or more decided applications, from the lowest allowance rate to the highest; the dashed line is this university. Switch the measure.
Timeline
Allowed in green, abandoned in red, pending in grey. The figures above and every chart that can be recomputed by filing year follow the span you pick; the rest are marked all years.
Ask the record
Grant rate from the first action
The gold line is this record and the blue line is the USPTO. The marker is the three-year grant rate.
Outcome simulator
A model of this record’s own transitions: each examiner action, the response to it, and what came next. Thin data borrows from the USPTO.
Prosecution paths
Every application’s sequence of examiner actions, from the first action to the outcome. Hover a band for the count.
Compared with the office
The same figures for this record and for the whole office.
Allowance over time
Share allowed (gold) and abandoned (red) by month since filing, with pending cases counted only while they are pending.
Rejection fingerprint
Share of office actions raising each ground; blue is the USPTO.
After a response
How often each ground is gone from the next action once it has been answered.
What works
Allowance rate among decided cases where each move was used at least once, against the USPTO.
Interviews
Allowance with and without an examiner interview, and how often interviews happen.
Odds by round
After the first, second and later rejections.
Response clock
How long the office takes to act once a response is in.
Quarter-end timing
Allowances by week of the USPTO fiscal quarter. An even spread would put 15% in the last two weeks.
Cited art
From the rejections in the most recently decided applications.
Trend
Is it getting easier or harder? Gold is this record, blue is the USPTO.
Appeals
Appeals filed, briefs, examiner’s answers, and how the Board decided.
Domains
The technology domains and the art units with the most of these applications.
Examiners met
The allowance rate of this university’s decided applications with each examiner.
Bars show the share of decided applications that were allowed.
Who represents them
How often each firm’s applications for this university were allowed.
Bars show the share of decided applications that were allowed.
The portfolio
Filed and granted
Filed by the year of filing, granted by the year the patent issued; the best year for grants was 2018 with 3.
Where it is examined
How many applications each tech center and art unit took, and how they fared there against what the unit usually allows.
Bars show the share of decided applications allowed in each; the white mark is what that unit allows across every applicant.
Technology mix
Applications by filing year, stacked by technology domain. Click a domain to hide or show it.
Outside counsel
Applications across, allowance rate up; larger bubbles took longer. Click a bubble to open it.
Inventors
Named inventors by the number of these applications they are on.
Start-ups
Where the university’s inventors also turn up as founders and early staff.
| Start-up | Inventors shared with the university | Its applications | First filed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Start-up 1 | 4 | 13 | 2020 |
| Start-up 2 | 3 | 12 | 2021 |
| Start-up 3 | 3 | 11 | 2022 |
| Start-up 4 | 2 | 10 | 2023 |
| Start-up 5 | 2 | 9 | 2019 |
| Start-up 6 | 1 | 8 | 2020 |
Young companies (first filed in 2018 or later, with a small portfolio) that name at least one inventor who is also named on this university’s applications. A sign of spin-outs and founder ties, not proof of a license: an inventor is a name at one location.
The cost of this record
What prosecution takes after filing, priced two ways. The same examiner can cost twice what another costs.
| Actions | Months | At firm rates | With Patly | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| This record | 2.4 | 27 | $7,836 | $1,834 |
Averages over 420 decided applications, granted and abandoned alike. Firm rates are assumptions: $2,800 per response, $600 per interview, $7,500 per appeal. The Patly column swaps in its published $299 per office action response and keeps everything else the same. USPTO fees for RCEs are counted in both. Drafting and filing are not included.
Indicative portfolio value
Each asset of this university priced on its own from its field, its age and what its prosecution shows, then added up. A package this size would trade below the sum.
An indicative range read from the record, not an appraisal. The claims are not read, and evidence of use, family members abroad, licenses and maintenance fees are not in the record: each can move a real price more than everything shown here. The starting range is an assumption for a routine granted US patent in a brokered sale; a buyer whose product the claims block can pay several times more.
Explore the portfolio
Hover any mark for the case behind it, click to open it, and download any view as an image or a table.
Every application
Filed across, months to the decision up; green allowed, red abandoned, blue pending; larger dots drew more rejections. Drag across the years to zoom, click a dot to open the case.
Technology
Sized by applications, colored by allowance rate. Click a field to open it.
The draw
Sized by applications, colored by allowance rate. A red tile is a hard unit; click one to see its examiners.
Decision calendar
Ten years of allowances, abandonments and first actions. Switch the measure to see each.
Rejections over time
The share of examined applications that drew each ground, by filing year. Click a ground to hide or show it.
Prosecution, case by case
Each row is one application from filing to its end: rejections, responses, interviews, RCEs and the outcome. Hover a mark for the date; click a row to open the case.
Applications
| Application | Title | Filed | Status | Rejections | RCEs | To 1st action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15661232 | USE OF METAL-ACCUMULATING PLANTS FOR THE PREPARATION OF CATALYSTS THAT CAN BE USED … | 2017-07-27 | Allowed | 1 | 0 | 14.9 mo |
| 15021070 | USE OF CERTAIN ORGANIC MATERIALS, CONTAINING ALKALI OR ALKALINE-EARTH METALS, FOR I… | 2016-03-10 | Abandoned | 3 | 1 | 8.6 mo |
| 14905119 | USES OF CERTAIN PLATINOID ACCUMULATING PLANTS FOR USE IN ORGANIC CHEMICAL REACTIONS | 2016-01-14 | Allowed | 1 | 0 | 19.3 mo |
| 15363598 | Method and apparatus for adaptive signal processing | 2012-01-10 | Allowed | 1 | 0 | 12.0 mo |
| 15310484 | Composition and method for controlled release | 2015-02-11 | Abandoned | 4 | 1 | 23.0 mo |
| 15163764 | Distributed ledger transaction verification | 2018-03-12 | Allowed | 3 | 0 | 20.0 mo |
| 15633278 | Thermal management of battery assemblies | 2021-04-13 | Pending | 2 | 1 | 17.0 mo |
| 15282790 | Machine learning model for anomaly detection | 2012-05-14 | Allowed | 1 | 0 | 14.0 mo |
| 15723781 | Wireless power transfer coil arrangement | 2015-06-15 | Abandoned | 4 | 1 | 25.0 mo |
| 15150653 | Catalyst for selective hydrogenation | 2018-07-16 | Allowed | 3 | 0 | 22.0 mo |
PATLY.AI