Pharma/Biotech. v. Technology: Patent Search & Analysis

1. 1
Pharma/biotech v. Technology
Patent Search and Analysis
PIUG 2014 Annual Conference
Dilip P. Pandya
Manager, Research & Analysis,
Qualcomm Library & Information Services
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

2. 2
Born Mobile™
27+ years of driving the evolution of wireless
communications
Making wireless more personal, affordable and
accessible
World’s largest fabless semiconductor company
S&P 100/ S&P 500/ Fortune 500
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

3. 3
AWARDS
AND HONORS
Recognition for our
technology innovations,
business leadership and
corporate culture.
FORTUNE and The World’s Most Admired Companies are registered trademarks of Time Inc. and are used under license.
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

4. 4
Agenda
Pharma/biotech v. Technology Patent Search and Analysis: Similarities and Differences
Current challenges
Case study – mining a large patent portfolio
Completing the picture
About me…1
2
3
4
5
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Technology v. Pharma Patents comparison

5. 5
About me…
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
What I used to do
− FTO, prior art searching, invalidity, supporting licensing & litigation
− Biosequence searching
− Chemical structure searching
What I do now – not a traditional patent searcher
− Patent landscaping of very large patent portfolios
− Lot of time devoted to developing iterative search strategies; analysis; custom macros; pivot tables
and heat maps
− Often combine patent data with business and competitive intelligence information to create a more complete
picture to address the question at hand, tapping into the expertise of other team members

6. 6
What types of output do I still generate?
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Country analysis : publication dates, priority dates, priority countries
Patent assignees vs. publication year /priority year /IPC /Derwent classes /CPC
Patent kind codes vs. country & year
Priority countries vs. earliest priority years
Reassignment analysis
Looking for patents in litigation, or subject to licensing / cross-licensing
So what do I have to do differently with Technology
patent searching ?

7. 7
Technology v. Pharma patents comparison
Comparing US Patent grants for 2013: technology clearly leads over Pharma
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

8. 8
Orange Book currently lists 3 patents for Lipitor –approved 1996
Orange Book currently lists 2 patents for Brintellix –approved 2013
By contrast, 802.11 WLAN standard lists over 190 patents!
FDA Approved drugs (Orange Book) v. technology patent comparison
Orange Book listed patents - drugs
Source: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/ob/default.cfm Source: http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/pat802_11.html
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
802.11 listed patents

9. 9
“The whole is greater than the sum of its parts” (Aristotle)
Smartphone - it seems like the sum of the parts is greater than the whole
Patents provide protection for a large number of components that go into a
Smartphone
Why so many technology patents?
Smartphone teardown example
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

10. 10
Portfolio size is fundamental difference
Size of technology patent portfolios is the single biggest challenge to search &
analysis
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Scope: ascertain the percentage of total patents filed annually in Korea, by technology company A
The total number of all patents is well over half a million!
Large
technology
company A
Filing Year Korea Global Total Korea % of total
1992 4273 3105 7378 58
1993 3505 2686 6191 57
1994 4194 2801 6995 60
1995 18023 3826 21849 82
1996 24258 8355 32613 74
1997 31215 9849 41064 76
1998 19184 11601 30785 62
1999 15185 9949 25134 60
2000 11569 8796 20365 57
2001 13212 12089 25301 52
2002 16059 15841 31900 50
2003 21863 22635 44498 49
2004 31802 30166 61968 51
2005 32923 37009 69932 47
2006 25601 39662 65263 39
2007 19275 32982 52257 37
2008 13744 25126 38870 35
2009 12884 18285 31169 41
2010 12769 18020 30789 41
2011 3544 15387 18931 19
2012 226 2510 2736 8
665988

11. 11
Process steps in dealing with the large patent portfolios
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Exporting from source:
1.Take the large portfolio and search date ranges that result in <60K records.
2. Reduce the set by DWPI families
3. Export all the required fields using TDA format

12. 12
Importing into TDA
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Import individual sets of <60K patents into TDA using the import filter.
− Only import Titles initially to minimize processing time as TDA uses local machine memory

13. 13
Combining data sets
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Combine date range sets using data fusion

14. 14
Import additional fields
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Import more fields into the fused set and analyze
− Adding secondary or other fields

15. 15
Analysis
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Typical analysis done using co-occurrence matrix
− Heatmaps, charting, relationships, etc.

16. 16
Completing the picture…
We often add other information to patent data to complete the competitive landscape
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.

17. 17
Current challenges, and how can the vendors & patent
offices help?
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Assignee normalization, everyone’s favorite! TDA’s DWPI clean-up, thesaurus and list clean up
functions do help somewhat but…
More timely reassignment information from the offices; identification of inventors reassigning to
own companies by vendors
Download fields that match the search fields
Download fields already parsed e.g. assignee1, assignee2, inventor1, inventor2 etc.
Cloud based batch processing solutions e.g. TDA runs on local machine, and runs out of
memory
Better seamless integration of patent data with other sources e.g. litigation, licensing, BI/CI,
standards, SEC, VC, M&A etc.

18. 18
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of Qualcomm Incorporated.
Thank you !
Questions?