Figure 1: Patent disputes in the District Court and PTAB for Q1-Q3 in 2015 have increased 9.8% as compared to Q1-Q3 2014.
Figure 2: Patent disputes have steadily grown since 2012.
*ITC filings since 2012 comprise only a nominal amount of patent disputes and are therefore not included here.
Figure 3: Patent Disputes by Sector
Figure 4: In Q3, the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas strengthened its position over the PTAB as the top venue for patent disputes.
District Court Litigation
Figure 5: Considering fourth quarter trends in 2014, the number of 2015 patent litigation filings is projected to surpass 5,200 by the end of the year.
Figure 6: In 2015, 67.2% of all patent litigation was NPE-generated.
Figure 7: NPE litigation made up 62.4% of District Court cases initiated in Q3 of 2015, as compared to 57.9% in Q3 of 2014.
Patent Litigation by Industry
Figure 8: The majority of patent litigation in the third quarter of 2015 occurred in the High-Tech sector.
Figure 9: High-Tech was the only sector in Q3 where a majority of cases were NPE-related.
*Cases filed by entities other than NPEs or operating companies comprise only a nominal amount of total cases and are therefore not included here.
Figure 10: NPE litigation made up 92% of High-Tech cases in the third quarter of 2015, compared to 89.8% in the first half of 2015 and 82.5% in Q3 and Q4 of 2014.
Figure 11: 92.6% of High-Tech cases related to NPEs were by Patent Assertion Entities.
Figure 12: PTAB petitions are projected to surpass 1,900 filings by the end of the year.
Figure 13: In 2015, 43.3% of all PTAB Petitions were filed by NPEs.
Figure 14: NPE petitions accounted for 40.4% of PTAB petitions filed in the third quarter of 2015.
PTAB Petitions by Industry
Figure 15: 61.3% of PTAB petitions in the third quarter of 2015 were High-Tech related.
Figure 16: In the third quarter of 2015, 61.6% of High-Tech PTAB Petitions were filed against NPE Patent Owners.
Figure 17: In Q3, 89.8% of High-Tech petitions related to NPEs were against Patent Assertion Entities.
Figure 18: Inter partes reviews (IPRs) account for 91.8% of all PTAB Petitions filed in 2015.
High Tech = Software, Hardware, Networking, etc.
Medical = Pharmaceuticals, Medical Devices, Health Related Technologies, etc…
Other = Mechanical, Packaged Good, Sporting Equipment, etc…
Non Practicing Entity (NPE) = Company which derives the majority of its total revenue from Patent Licensing activities.
Operating Company or Op. Co. = Company which derives most of its total revenue from Product Sales or Services. Could be an SME or a large company.
Other Entity = Universities / Non-Profits / Government / Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
NPE (Patent Assertion Entities) = Entity whose primary activity is licensing patents and acquired most of its patents from another entity
NPE (Small Company) = Entity whose original activity was providing products and services, but now is primarily focused on monetizing its own patent portfolio.
NPE (Individual) = Entity owned of controlled by an individual inventor who is primarily focused on monetizing inventions patents by that individual inventor.
SME = Companies that make less than $200 million in annual revenue.
Venue in Federal District Court
E.D. Tex. = Eastern District of Texas
D. Del. = Delaware C.D. Cal. = Central District of California
D.N.J. = New Jersey
N.D. Cal. = Northern District of California
Total number of reported cases can vary based on what is included. Unified made its best attempt to eliminate mistaken, duplicative, or changes in venue filings, hence the totals may vary by < 1% compared to other reporting entities.
This includes all District Court and PTAB litigations between January 1, 2015 and September 30, 2015
Statistics include litigations initiated by NPEs or Declaratory Judgments (DJs) initiated by operating companies against NPEs.
Unified strives to accurately identify NPEs through all available means, such as court filings, public documents, and product documentation.