The Duration of Patent Examination at the European Patent Office

References

• Christensen C. M., Overdorf M. Meeting the challenge of disruptive change. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2000) 78(2):66–76Google Scholar
• Cox D. R. Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J. Royal Statist. Soc. Ser. B (Methodological) (1972) 34(4):187–220Google Scholar
• Cox D. R., Oakes D.Analysis of Survival Data (Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability 21) (1984) (Chapman & Hall, London) Google Scholar
• Day G. S., Schoemaker P. J. H. Scanning the periphery. Harvard Bus. Rev. (2005) 78:66–76Google Scholar
• De Fraja G. Strategic spillovers in patent races. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (1993) 11(1):139–146Crossref, Google Scholar
• European Patent Office Annual report. (2003) . Technical report, European Patent Office, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
• European Patent Office European Patent Convention. (2007) 13th ed. http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/E4F8409B2A99862FC125736B00374CEC/$File/EPC_13th_edition.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Friebel G., Koch A. K., Prady D., Seabright P. Objectives and incentives at the European patent office. (2006) . Report, Institut d'Economie Industrielle, Toulouse, FranceGoogle Scholar
• Gambardella A., Harhoff D., Verspagen B. The value of European patents. Eur. Management Rev. (2008) 5:69–84Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans J. S., Hsu D. H., Stern S. The impact of uncertain intellectual property rights on the market for ideas: Evidence from patent grant delays. Management Sci. (2008) 54(5):982–997Link, Google Scholar
• Granstrand O.The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property: Towards Intellectual Capitalism (1999) (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK) Google Scholar
• Gray P. H., Meister D. B. Knowledge sourcing methods. Inform. Management (2006) 43(2):142–156Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall B. H. Exploring the patent explosion. J. Tech. Transfer (2005) 30:35–48Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D., Reitzig M. Strategien zur gewinnmaximierung bei der anmeldung von patenten. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft (ZfB) (2001) 71(5):509–529Google Scholar
• Harhoff D., Reitzig M. Determinants of opposition against EPO patent grants—The case of biotechnology and pharmaceuticals. Internat. J. Indust. Organ. (2004) 22(4):443–480Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D., Wagner S. Modelling the duration of patent examination at the European Patent Office. (2005) . CEPR Discussion Paper 5283, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
• Harhoff D., Hoisl K., Webb C. European patent citations—How to count and how to interpret them. (2006) . Discussion paper, University of Munich, Munich, GermanyGoogle Scholar
• Harhoff D., Narin F., Scherer F. M., Vopel K. Citation frequency and the value of patented innovation. Rev. Econom. Statist. (1999) 81(3):511–515Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson D., Popp D. Forced out of the closet: The impact of the American inventors protection act on the timing of patent disclosure. RAND J. Econom. (2003) 34(1):96–112Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalbfleisch J. D., Prentice R. L.The Statistical Analysis of Failure Time Data (2002) 2nd ed.(Wiley, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kortum S., Lerner J. What is behind the recent surge in patenting? Res. Policy (1999) 28:1–22Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lanjouw J., Schankerman M. Patent quality and research productivity: Measuring innovation with multiple indicators. Econom. J. (2004) 114:441–465Google Scholar
• Lee T., Wilde L. L. Market structure and innovation: A reformulation. Quart. J. Econom. (1980) 94(2):429–436Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lemley M., Shapiro C. Probabilistic patents. J. Econom. Perspectives (2005) 19(2):75–98Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lev B.Intangibles—Management, Measurement, and Reporting (2001) (Brooking Institution, New York) Google Scholar
• Loury G. C. Market structure and innovation. Quart. J. Econom. (1979) 93(3):395–410Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGuinley C. Global patent warming. Intellectual Asset Magazine (2008) 31:24–30Google Scholar
• Meyer M. What is so special about patent citations? Differences between scientific and patent citations. Scientometrics (2000) 49(1):93–123Crossref, Google Scholar
• Michel J., Bettels B. Patent citation analysis—A closer look at the basic input data from patent search reports. Scientometrics (2001) 51(1):185–201Crossref, Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development The measurement of scientific and technological activities—Using patent data as science and technology indicators. (1994) . Technical report, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
• Pitkethly R. Intellectual property strategy in Japanese and UK companies: Patent licensing decisions and learning opportunities. Res. Policy (2001) 30(3):425–442Crossref, Google Scholar
• Popp D., Juhl T., Johnson D., Daniel K. N. Time in purgatory: Examining the grant lag for U.S. patent applications. Topics Econom. Anal. Policy (2004) 4(1). Article 29, http://www.bepress.com/bejeap/topics/vol4/iss1/art29Google Scholar
• Regibeau P., Rockett K. Are more important patents approved more slowly and should they be? J. Indust. Econom. (2009) . ForthcomingGoogle Scholar
• Reitzig M., Puranam P. Value appropriation as an organizational capability: The case of IP protection through patents. Strategic Management J. (2009) 30(7):765–789Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivette K. G., Kline D.Rembrandts in the Attic: Unlocking the Hidden Value of Patents (2000) (Harvard University Press, Boston) Google Scholar
• Teece D. J., Pisano G., Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management J. (1997) 18(7):509–533Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thomas J. M. On the interpretation of covariate estimates in independent competing risks models. Bull. Econom. Res. (1996) 48(1):27–39Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M. A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of inventions. RAND J. Econom. (1990) 21(1):172–184Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M., Henderson R., Jaffe A. University versus corporate patents: A window on the basicness of invention. Econom. Innovation New Tech. (1997) 5(1):19–50Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Graevenitz G., Wagner S., Harhoff D. Incidence and growth of patent thickets—The impact of technological opportunities and complexity. (2008) . CEPR Discussion Paper 6900, Centre for Economic Policy Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
• von Graevenitz G., Wagner S., Hoisl K., Hall B., Harhoff D., Giuri P., Gambardella A. The strategic use of patents and its implications for enterprise and competition policies. (2007) . Report for the European Commission, European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
• Wooldridge J. M.Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• World Intellectual Property Organization PCT applicant's guide—International phase—Annex A. (2009) . http://www.wipo.int/pct/guide/en/gdvol1/annexes/annexa/ax_a.pdfGoogle Scholar