Understanding Juristat's Top Patent Firms: FAQs and Methodology

No! Firms do not have to use Juristat, nor do they need to apply to participate in the rankings. The Top Patent Firm rankings are powered by our industry-leading database of more than 10 million patent applications. This is the very same database that makes our tools so robust.

Design patents tend to have higher-than-average allowance rates, which can throw off the analysis. Comparing a firm that does all utility patents with a firm that has even one design patent would put the latter at an advantage. As you noticed, we also skipped ranking firms in TC 2900, where most/all the design patents are assigned.

Similarly, we exclude foreign priority applications to level the playing field for the analysis as foreign priority applications generally have a higher allowance rate.

To qualify for inclusion, a firm must have filed a minimum of 50 applications in the tech center during the time period studied. This ensures the firm has extensive experience in that technology center and provides an appropriate-sized dataset to evaluate performance metrics. 

Keen observers may notice that previous iterations of the rankings (2019-2022) set the threshold at 100 applications in a single year in the specific technology center. At such a high filing requirement, we felt the list was favoring large firms and that many firms with excellent performance metrics were ineligible because they had filed just under 100 applications. 

For the 2024 rankings, we opted to change the threshold of our ranking methodology to 50 applications filed in the specific technology center in a single year. This is still a significant filing volume to demonstrate expertise and an appropriate-sized dataset to evaluate performance metrics.

No, Juristat's rankings consider both volume and performance in that specific technology center. We based the rankings on how well a firm performed in three key metrics over a 12-month period. These metrics are: Number of applications filed, Allowance rate, Average number of office actions before allowance. A firm is required to have filed at least 50 applications in the specified technology center in the one-year time frame to be eligible for the rankings. 

No, allowance rate is just one way to measure a firm’s success at the USPTO. Juristat's rankings consider both volume and performance in that specific technology center. We based the rankings on how well a firm performed in three key metrics over a 12-month period.

These metrics are:

• Number of applications filed,
• Allowance rate,
• Average number of office actions before allowance. 

This list (and all those featured on our blog) are powered by our database of more than 10 million patent applications at the USPTO. Our database includes global and foreign law firms to the extent they prosecute applications under their own name in the United States. Many foreign firms choose to file applications through another U.S. firm and may not be included in this analysis.

If your firm did not rank, it could be for a number of reasons.

1. You may not have been one of the top-performing firms in that technology center for the specific key metrics we examine. 
   
   
2. Your firm may have been excluded because you didn’t have 50+ filings in the particular technology center during this time period. Keep in mind, this analysis only considers published applications and excludes design and foreign priority. Credit is given to the firm at disposition as listed on the final application. Or,
   
   
3. Each edition of Top Patent Firms is based on data available at that time. These lists went through extensive review and quality assurance before publishing. Keep in mind, however, Juristat is constantly reprocessing to pull in new data. This gives our clients access to the most robust patent database on the market. It also means that specific metrics tend to change slightly over time as more information is added into the dataset. Juristat is constantly acquiring data from multiple sources, including Patent Center, Global Dossier, PEDS, the weekly Publication and Issuance Gazetteers, the Assignments data feed, and more. 

While we do not publicly share the raw data or rank for every firm, this data was all compiled using Juristat Analytics. Our powerful search and filtering capabilities, along with the ability to quickly export large datasets, make in-depth analysis like this possible. Additionally, our side-by-side intelligence reports make it easy to compare metrics from firms, companies, centers, art units, classes, and more. If you'd like to see how our competitive intelligence reporting works, set up a call with us.

There’s no call for participation or entry fee associated with our Top Patent Firms lists. These rankings (and all those featured on our blog) are powered by our industry-leading database of more than 10 million patent applications.

If you'd like to discuss ways to identify opportunities and improve prosecution outcomes, schedule a consultation with our team.

Like any of our reports, case studies, and webinars, this list is a valuable resource that requires some contact information, including an email address, to access. Providing your email address also allows you to receive other, similar reports and insight from Juristat. Of course, you can manage your communication preferences or unsubscribe at any time.

On the Archive page, you may notice we have 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022; this current list is 2024. At Juristat, we are committed to the integrity of our data, both in our product and in our annual Top Firms ranking. Maintaining that standard requires significant time and focus. In 2023, we made the strategic decision to focus on product development and customer success, and pause publishing our annual rankings. Now, with renewed capacity, we’re excited to resume the rankings in 2024, offering even more comprehensive insights for firms navigating the competitive patent landscape.