Presentation by Michael-Paul James on What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery” by Joan Farre-Mensa, Deepak Hegde, Alexander Ljungqvist.
Seed financings enable a startup to put together its initial team, build a working prototype, and begin to test the market. Often these investments are made via convertible debt or SAFEs. Veteran Silicon Valley startup and corporate attorney Jason Putnam Gordon will cover the following topics:
1. Required corporate structure
2. Legal considerations when pitching investors for seed financing
3. Differences between using convertible debt and SAFEs
4. Key terms and considerations when raising seed funding
5. Common mistakes and pitfalls that companies make when raising seed funding via convertible debt and SAFEs
6. How to close your seed financing
7. Important post-closing tasks
8. And much, much more
The document discusses financial regulation and why it is important, focusing on regulations for banks. It addresses eight categories of banking regulations: (1) government safety nets like FDIC insurance that aim to protect depositors but can encourage moral hazard; (2) restrictions on asset holdings and capital requirements to reduce risk; (3) bank supervision through chartering and examinations; (4) assessing risk management; (5) disclosure requirements to provide transparency; (6) consumer protections; (7) restrictions on competition (now eliminated); and (8) lessons from the 1980s financial crisis when deregulation increased risks. While regulations aim to promote stability, they also sometimes introduce new problems or are insufficient to prevent crises.
Financial crime hot topics: DPA's and Correspondent BankingBovill
At our February briefing in London, we looked at the evolution of and practical approaches to two current hot topics, Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) and Correspondent Banking.
This document discusses financial regulation and outlines eight categories of banking regulations. It notes that regulations aim to maintain market confidence, financial stability, and consumer protection. Regulations also seek to reduce financial crime and regulate foreign participation in financial markets. The document provides examples of regulations like government safety nets, capital requirements, bank supervision, and consumer protections. However, it acknowledges that regulations can sometimes create new problems like moral hazard and reduced efficiency and competition.
How to Position Your Startup for Venture Capital Fundingideatoipo
This document provides an overview of how startups can position themselves for venture capital funding. It discusses foundational concepts like entity structure, founder agreements, financing stages from convertible notes to Series A/B rounds. Key terms are explained like pre-money valuation, post-money valuation, and dilution. Common mistakes made by startups are also outlined such as non-compliance with securities laws and not properly managing equity records. The presentation aims to give founders a better understanding of attracting VC investment and negotiating favorable deal terms.
The FCA Business Plan for 2016/17 outlines 7 priorities that are carried over from last year: pensions, financial crime, wholesale markets, advice, innovation/technology, culture/governance, and treatment of existing customers. The plan emphasizes continuing themes of complex business models, acting in customers' interests, and encouraging new technology. Key responses include implementing new regulations on markets and financial crime, focusing on culture and accountability, and protecting customers in advice, pensions and insurance. Brexit is also addressed, with the FCA considering potential short-term market volatility and longer term consequences depending on future UK-EU relations.
This presentation by Professor Spencer Weber Waller, Loyola University Chicago School of Law, was made during the discussion on "Addressing competition challenges in financial markets" held at the 2017 Latin American and Caribbean Competition Forum (4-5 April 2017 – Managua, Nicaragua). More papers and presentations can be found at oe.cd/laccf.
Seed financings enable a startup to put together its initial team, build a working prototype, and begin to test the market. Often these investments are made via convertible debt or SAFEs. Veteran Silicon Valley startup and corporate attorney Jason Putnam Gordon will cover the following topics:
1. Required corporate structure
2. Legal considerations when pitching investors for seed financing
3. Differences between using convertible debt and SAFEs
4. Key terms and considerations when raising seed funding
5. Common mistakes and pitfalls that companies make when raising seed funding via convertible debt and SAFEs
6. How to close your seed financing
7. Important post-closing tasks
8. And much, much more
The document discusses financial regulation and why it is important, focusing on regulations for banks. It addresses eight categories of banking regulations: (1) government safety nets like FDIC insurance that aim to protect depositors but can encourage moral hazard; (2) restrictions on asset holdings and capital requirements to reduce risk; (3) bank supervision through chartering and examinations; (4) assessing risk management; (5) disclosure requirements to provide transparency; (6) consumer protections; (7) restrictions on competition (now eliminated); and (8) lessons from the 1980s financial crisis when deregulation increased risks. While regulations aim to promote stability, they also sometimes introduce new problems or are insufficient to prevent crises.
Financial crime hot topics: DPA's and Correspondent BankingBovill
At our February briefing in London, we looked at the evolution of and practical approaches to two current hot topics, Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) and Correspondent Banking.
This document discusses financial regulation and outlines eight categories of banking regulations. It notes that regulations aim to maintain market confidence, financial stability, and consumer protection. Regulations also seek to reduce financial crime and regulate foreign participation in financial markets. The document provides examples of regulations like government safety nets, capital requirements, bank supervision, and consumer protections. However, it acknowledges that regulations can sometimes create new problems like moral hazard and reduced efficiency and competition.
How to Position Your Startup for Venture Capital Fundingideatoipo
This document provides an overview of how startups can position themselves for venture capital funding. It discusses foundational concepts like entity structure, founder agreements, financing stages from convertible notes to Series A/B rounds. Key terms are explained like pre-money valuation, post-money valuation, and dilution. Common mistakes made by startups are also outlined such as non-compliance with securities laws and not properly managing equity records. The presentation aims to give founders a better understanding of attracting VC investment and negotiating favorable deal terms.
The FCA Business Plan for 2016/17 outlines 7 priorities that are carried over from last year: pensions, financial crime, wholesale markets, advice, innovation/technology, culture/governance, and treatment of existing customers. The plan emphasizes continuing themes of complex business models, acting in customers' interests, and encouraging new technology. Key responses include implementing new regulations on markets and financial crime, focusing on culture and accountability, and protecting customers in advice, pensions and insurance. Brexit is also addressed, with the FCA considering potential short-term market volatility and longer term consequences depending on future UK-EU relations.
This presentation by Professor Spencer Weber Waller, Loyola University Chicago School of Law, was made during the discussion on "Addressing competition challenges in financial markets" held at the 2017 Latin American and Caribbean Competition Forum (4-5 April 2017 – Managua, Nicaragua). More papers and presentations can be found at oe.cd/laccf.
Brief The Board, Osler’s new five part webinar series, will provide you with practical tips on how to brief your board members and senior management, both in terms of key substantive points and effective (and privileged) communication skills, so you and your organization can respond nimbly and competently in business critical situations.
This resume is for a senior corporate counsel with over 30 years of experience in commercial, technology licensing, international, compliance, litigation, and contracts. They have negotiated over $300 million in contracts for a $2 billion international turbine manufacturer. As a key member of the Ethics & Compliance Committee, they counsel C-level executives and support the General Counsel in developing strategies. They ensure adherence to compliance to limit risk exposure and liability for the company. The counsel has extensive experience drafting and negotiating complex international contracts and deals, as well as implementing best practices, training programs, and risk assessment guidelines for compliance.
The European Banking Authority are proposing to change fundamentally the prudential landscape for investment firms. In this briefing we looked at these proposals for strategic context around the update to your 2016 ICAAP.
The deal is complete, and the parties have finished the hard work. Or have they? Integration planning turns to execution as people, process, and technology are combined once the deal is legally closed. The buyer will need to consider the purchased business or assets from the standpoint of employees, IT, customers, suppliers, and a multitude of other areas. In addition, numerous post-closing legal issues may arise, including purchase price adjustments, breaches of representations and warranties, enforcement of key negative employment-related covenants and restrictive covenants, collection of pre-closing accounts receivable, and true-ups of final financials. This episode guides listeners through the process, timing, and issues which most commonly arise after the closing of deals.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/post-closing-issues-integration-potential-buyer-seller-disputes-2021/
Nuts & Bolts of Lost Profit Cases (Series: Complex Financial Litigation 2020) Financial Poise
Business does not always go as planned. When a vendor breaches their contract to supply key parts, a lender reneges on their loan commitment, or a fire decimates a central distribution facility, the impacted business may have grounds to seek compensation in the form of the profits it would have earned had everything just gone smoothly. In order to successfully win (or defend against) any such claim, one must compile and analyze certain types of documents and information, understand and apply appropriate methodologies, and present their case in a manner consistent with that which the court or trier of fact requires. In this webinar, the expert panel discusses the circumstances that warrant lost profits claims, key considerations for both the claimant and defendant, and how such claims will ultimately be evaluated.
To listen to this webinar on-demand, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/lost-profit-cases-2020/
This presentation was delivered at the ISO 37001 & Anti-Bribery PECB Insights Conference by Ralph Haddad, Global Compliance Leader at Anti-Corruption at CAE Inc.
7.23.20 How to Raise Seed Funding for Your Startup: Convertible Notes and S...ideatoipo
Seed financings enable a startup to put together its initial team, build a working prototype, and begin to test the market. Often these investments are made via convertible debt or SAFEs. Veteran Silicon Valley startup and corporate attorney Jason Putnam Gordon will cover the following topics:
1. Required corporate structure
2. Legal considerations when pitching investors for seed financing
3. Differences between using convertible debt and SAFEs
4. Key terms and considerations when raising seed funding
5. Common mistakes and pitfalls that companies make when raising seed funding via convertible debt and SAFEs
6. How to close your seed financing
7. Important post-closing tasks
8. And much, much more
Come with your questions and get ready to be excited about seed financings!
.
About the Speaker
Jason Putnam Gordon is a results-oriented corporate attorney practicing in the Venture Capital and Emerging Growth Companies group in Polsinelli’s San Francisco office. Jason has a passion for working with experienced entrepreneurs and executives to make their vision a reality.
In his practice, he regularly represents companies throughout their life cycle in matters related to venture capital financing, strategic corporate relationships, corporate formation, complex mergers and acquisitions, sales, and divestitures. With industry focuses on consumer goods and technology, because of his broad skill set and deep network, Jason regularly works in wide array of verticals including artificial intelligence, virtual reality, augmented reality, video games, software, hardware, life sciences, the internet of things and agricultural technology.
Jason works with companies based locally, elsewhere in the U.S. and internationally. Jason brings a unique skill set to the negotiating table and to litigation-minimization strategies in the board room. He started his career as a federal law clerk in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and then continued as a litigator handling corporate, securities, intellectual property, and commercial litigation before establishing a transactional practice.
Outside of the office, Jason is dedicated to his family and has a passion for skydiving and indoor body flight.
If you have any questions regarding the content of this presentation, you can reach Jason at:
JGordon@polsinelli.com
How to Raise Seed Funding for Your Startup: Convertible Notes and SAFEsideatoipo
This document summarizes a presentation about raising seed funding for startups through convertible notes and SAFEs (simple agreements for future equity). It discusses the speaker's background in venture capital law, structural considerations for startups, options for seed financing like convertible debt/equity, key terms to consider, and common mistakes to avoid. The presentation provides an overview of the process for closing a seed round financing and important post-closing tasks.
Learn how to effectively communicate to your business' leaders about the difference between arbitration and litigation, including associated benefits and risks.
How to Prepare Your Startup for an M & A Exitideatoipo
You've labored for years on your startup and now it's time for an exit. Lack of sufficient preparation will lower the valuation of the company and may even kill your deal. San Francisco-based startup and venture capital attorney Jason Putnam Gordon of Polsinelli LLP will discuss how to properly prepare your startup for an M&A exit.
The program will cover the following:
Pre-M&A process
Parallel tracking additional capital raises
Overview of valuations and why you care
Liquidation waterfalls
Basic deal structures
Letters of Intent and Term Sheets
The diligence process
Negotiating the definitive agreements
The closing process
Post-closing issues
Common pitfalls and deal-killing mistakes
And much, much more!
Risk intelligence: How to reliably mitigate transaction risk and secure clean...Graeme Cross
This risk intelligence white paper is part of a series of publications from Aon Strategic Advisors & Transaction Solutions (ASATS). The series focuses on risk management and mitigation and is specifically created to help:
• Chief executives and corporate management board members pursuing growth strategies through M&A, or divesting
• Corporate tax managers, development officers and legal counsel responsible for planning, overseeing and / or delivering planned value from M&A
• Chief executive and chief financial officers of private-equity backed portfolio companies
• Private equity executives, portfolio managers and risk officers
• Corporate finance, accounting, tax and legal advisors servicing corporate and private
equity clients
Common Issues and Strategies in Business Breakups (Series: Complex Financial ...Financial Poise
As any entrepreneur will attest, starting and operating a business comes with unique challenges. These challenges are a key reason that, by some estimates, half of the companies that are founded today will not exist four years from now. It can be argued that the effort and attention needed to find success precludes business owners from planning for failure. This webinar focuses on the realities of a failing business from the owners’ perspective. Join our panel of experts as they discuss the various considerations that should be given at the outset of start-up negotiations and through business breakup, including dispute negotiation and litigation.
To listen to this webinar on-demand, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/common-issues-strategies-business-breakups-2020/
The document discusses the risk and dispute management services provided by Finlaysons. It describes assisting clients with risk assessments, strategies, and compliance systems to prevent issues. It also helps clients respond to and manage critical incidents through immediate response, investigations, and negotiations. Additionally, it describes managing various types of commercial litigation and disputes through alternative dispute resolution and representation in courts. The services aim to help clients effectively address risks, incidents, and disputes to minimize costs and other impacts.
"Cross-Border Transactions from a US Perspective” was presented by Martijn Steger on September 12, 2008, to Deutscher Handels-und Gesellschaftsrechtstag in Berlin Germany.
Martijn discussed the attorney/client relationship, due diligence, break-up fees and selected German law provisions that U.S. clients have trouble understanding or accepting.
ECI FIRPTA - OPG Presentation 2015-06-24 FINAL DRAFTPaul Wiley
This document provides a summary of key concepts regarding effectively connected income (ECI) and the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) for alternative investment managers. It discusses how certain investment and business activities conducted in the US, such as direct lending, loan origination, investments in partnerships, and interests in US real property, can generate ECI and be subject to US taxation. It also notes that otherwise safe harbored investment income and gains could be recharacterized as ECI if the underlying activities constitute a US trade or business. The document cautions managers to consider facts and circumstances carefully to avoid unintentionally generating ECI.
Nuts & Bolts of Lost Profit Cases (Series: Complex Financial Litigation)Financial Poise
Business does not always go as planned. When a vendor breaches their contract to supply key parts, a lender reneges on their loan commitment, or a fire decimates a central distribution facility, the impacted business may have grounds to seek compensation in the form of the profits it would have earned had everything just gone smoothly. In order to successfully win (or defend against) any such claim, one must compile and analyze certain types of documents and information, understand and apply appropriate methodologies, and present their case in a manner consistent with that which the court or trier of fact requires. In this webinar, the expert panel discusses the circumstances that warrant lost profits claims, key considerations for both the claimant and defendant, and how such claims will ultimately be evaluated.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/nuts-bolts-of-lost-profit-cases-2021/
Loan Workout 101 for Financial InstitutionsLibby Bierman
Ancin Cooley, founder and principal of Synergy Bank Consulting and Synergy Credit Union Consulting, will present on managing non-performing loans. Synergy provides risk management services to financial institutions. Cooley has over 10 years of experience, including as a regulatory examiner at the OCC. The presentation will cover warning signs of troubled loans, establishing transfer criteria to non-performing classifications, addressing documentation errors, using dunning letters, types of loan guarantees, analyzing and separating non-performing loans into groups, and assessing business problems and cash flow. The presentation is intended to help financial institutions better manage troubled and non-performing loans.
Trinan specializes in commercial loan workouts and debt restructuring. They negotiate modifications to loan terms like interest rates, payment amounts, and maturity dates. Trinan has experience with many types of commercial loans. Their team of executives with banking experience lead each negotiation. Through industry relationships, they have a high success rate in resolving workouts.
Intellectual Property Valuation Case studyMike Blake
This document provides an overview and case study of valuing intellectual property, specifically a pending patent application for a new 3D printing technology. It discusses key considerations in valuing early-stage intellectual property including determining the market potential and commercial viability of the technology. It then presents the valuation analyst's use of the income approach to estimate the fair value of the pending patent application at $1,900, considering projected revenues, royalty rates, development costs and other factors. It also briefly discusses determining reasonable royalty rates for patent infringement cases.
BrundidgeStanger-IAM-magazine-2015QualityRankingDavid Lee
The document discusses recent initiatives by the USPTO and Supreme Court rulings that have increased focus on patent quality in the US. It summarizes a study ranking the top US law firms in terms of the quality of patents they obtain based on an "Ocean Tomo Rating" score. Firms specializing in specific industries like healthcare and IT dominate the rankings. The popularity of new post-issuance review procedures introduced by the America Invents Act have further intensified scrutiny on patent quality and changed how patent applications are drafted.
Brief The Board, Osler’s new five part webinar series, will provide you with practical tips on how to brief your board members and senior management, both in terms of key substantive points and effective (and privileged) communication skills, so you and your organization can respond nimbly and competently in business critical situations.
This resume is for a senior corporate counsel with over 30 years of experience in commercial, technology licensing, international, compliance, litigation, and contracts. They have negotiated over $300 million in contracts for a $2 billion international turbine manufacturer. As a key member of the Ethics & Compliance Committee, they counsel C-level executives and support the General Counsel in developing strategies. They ensure adherence to compliance to limit risk exposure and liability for the company. The counsel has extensive experience drafting and negotiating complex international contracts and deals, as well as implementing best practices, training programs, and risk assessment guidelines for compliance.
The European Banking Authority are proposing to change fundamentally the prudential landscape for investment firms. In this briefing we looked at these proposals for strategic context around the update to your 2016 ICAAP.
The deal is complete, and the parties have finished the hard work. Or have they? Integration planning turns to execution as people, process, and technology are combined once the deal is legally closed. The buyer will need to consider the purchased business or assets from the standpoint of employees, IT, customers, suppliers, and a multitude of other areas. In addition, numerous post-closing legal issues may arise, including purchase price adjustments, breaches of representations and warranties, enforcement of key negative employment-related covenants and restrictive covenants, collection of pre-closing accounts receivable, and true-ups of final financials. This episode guides listeners through the process, timing, and issues which most commonly arise after the closing of deals.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/post-closing-issues-integration-potential-buyer-seller-disputes-2021/
Nuts & Bolts of Lost Profit Cases (Series: Complex Financial Litigation 2020) Financial Poise
Business does not always go as planned. When a vendor breaches their contract to supply key parts, a lender reneges on their loan commitment, or a fire decimates a central distribution facility, the impacted business may have grounds to seek compensation in the form of the profits it would have earned had everything just gone smoothly. In order to successfully win (or defend against) any such claim, one must compile and analyze certain types of documents and information, understand and apply appropriate methodologies, and present their case in a manner consistent with that which the court or trier of fact requires. In this webinar, the expert panel discusses the circumstances that warrant lost profits claims, key considerations for both the claimant and defendant, and how such claims will ultimately be evaluated.
To listen to this webinar on-demand, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/lost-profit-cases-2020/
This presentation was delivered at the ISO 37001 & Anti-Bribery PECB Insights Conference by Ralph Haddad, Global Compliance Leader at Anti-Corruption at CAE Inc.
7.23.20 How to Raise Seed Funding for Your Startup: Convertible Notes and S...ideatoipo
Seed financings enable a startup to put together its initial team, build a working prototype, and begin to test the market. Often these investments are made via convertible debt or SAFEs. Veteran Silicon Valley startup and corporate attorney Jason Putnam Gordon will cover the following topics:
1. Required corporate structure
2. Legal considerations when pitching investors for seed financing
3. Differences between using convertible debt and SAFEs
4. Key terms and considerations when raising seed funding
5. Common mistakes and pitfalls that companies make when raising seed funding via convertible debt and SAFEs
6. How to close your seed financing
7. Important post-closing tasks
8. And much, much more
Come with your questions and get ready to be excited about seed financings!
.
About the Speaker
Jason Putnam Gordon is a results-oriented corporate attorney practicing in the Venture Capital and Emerging Growth Companies group in Polsinelli’s San Francisco office. Jason has a passion for working with experienced entrepreneurs and executives to make their vision a reality.
In his practice, he regularly represents companies throughout their life cycle in matters related to venture capital financing, strategic corporate relationships, corporate formation, complex mergers and acquisitions, sales, and divestitures. With industry focuses on consumer goods and technology, because of his broad skill set and deep network, Jason regularly works in wide array of verticals including artificial intelligence, virtual reality, augmented reality, video games, software, hardware, life sciences, the internet of things and agricultural technology.
Jason works with companies based locally, elsewhere in the U.S. and internationally. Jason brings a unique skill set to the negotiating table and to litigation-minimization strategies in the board room. He started his career as a federal law clerk in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and then continued as a litigator handling corporate, securities, intellectual property, and commercial litigation before establishing a transactional practice.
Outside of the office, Jason is dedicated to his family and has a passion for skydiving and indoor body flight.
If you have any questions regarding the content of this presentation, you can reach Jason at:
JGordon@polsinelli.com
How to Raise Seed Funding for Your Startup: Convertible Notes and SAFEsideatoipo
This document summarizes a presentation about raising seed funding for startups through convertible notes and SAFEs (simple agreements for future equity). It discusses the speaker's background in venture capital law, structural considerations for startups, options for seed financing like convertible debt/equity, key terms to consider, and common mistakes to avoid. The presentation provides an overview of the process for closing a seed round financing and important post-closing tasks.
Learn how to effectively communicate to your business' leaders about the difference between arbitration and litigation, including associated benefits and risks.
How to Prepare Your Startup for an M & A Exitideatoipo
You've labored for years on your startup and now it's time for an exit. Lack of sufficient preparation will lower the valuation of the company and may even kill your deal. San Francisco-based startup and venture capital attorney Jason Putnam Gordon of Polsinelli LLP will discuss how to properly prepare your startup for an M&A exit.
The program will cover the following:
Pre-M&A process
Parallel tracking additional capital raises
Overview of valuations and why you care
Liquidation waterfalls
Basic deal structures
Letters of Intent and Term Sheets
The diligence process
Negotiating the definitive agreements
The closing process
Post-closing issues
Common pitfalls and deal-killing mistakes
And much, much more!
Risk intelligence: How to reliably mitigate transaction risk and secure clean...Graeme Cross
This risk intelligence white paper is part of a series of publications from Aon Strategic Advisors & Transaction Solutions (ASATS). The series focuses on risk management and mitigation and is specifically created to help:
• Chief executives and corporate management board members pursuing growth strategies through M&A, or divesting
• Corporate tax managers, development officers and legal counsel responsible for planning, overseeing and / or delivering planned value from M&A
• Chief executive and chief financial officers of private-equity backed portfolio companies
• Private equity executives, portfolio managers and risk officers
• Corporate finance, accounting, tax and legal advisors servicing corporate and private
equity clients
Common Issues and Strategies in Business Breakups (Series: Complex Financial ...Financial Poise
As any entrepreneur will attest, starting and operating a business comes with unique challenges. These challenges are a key reason that, by some estimates, half of the companies that are founded today will not exist four years from now. It can be argued that the effort and attention needed to find success precludes business owners from planning for failure. This webinar focuses on the realities of a failing business from the owners’ perspective. Join our panel of experts as they discuss the various considerations that should be given at the outset of start-up negotiations and through business breakup, including dispute negotiation and litigation.
To listen to this webinar on-demand, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/common-issues-strategies-business-breakups-2020/
The document discusses the risk and dispute management services provided by Finlaysons. It describes assisting clients with risk assessments, strategies, and compliance systems to prevent issues. It also helps clients respond to and manage critical incidents through immediate response, investigations, and negotiations. Additionally, it describes managing various types of commercial litigation and disputes through alternative dispute resolution and representation in courts. The services aim to help clients effectively address risks, incidents, and disputes to minimize costs and other impacts.
"Cross-Border Transactions from a US Perspective” was presented by Martijn Steger on September 12, 2008, to Deutscher Handels-und Gesellschaftsrechtstag in Berlin Germany.
Martijn discussed the attorney/client relationship, due diligence, break-up fees and selected German law provisions that U.S. clients have trouble understanding or accepting.
ECI FIRPTA - OPG Presentation 2015-06-24 FINAL DRAFTPaul Wiley
This document provides a summary of key concepts regarding effectively connected income (ECI) and the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA) for alternative investment managers. It discusses how certain investment and business activities conducted in the US, such as direct lending, loan origination, investments in partnerships, and interests in US real property, can generate ECI and be subject to US taxation. It also notes that otherwise safe harbored investment income and gains could be recharacterized as ECI if the underlying activities constitute a US trade or business. The document cautions managers to consider facts and circumstances carefully to avoid unintentionally generating ECI.
Nuts & Bolts of Lost Profit Cases (Series: Complex Financial Litigation)Financial Poise
Business does not always go as planned. When a vendor breaches their contract to supply key parts, a lender reneges on their loan commitment, or a fire decimates a central distribution facility, the impacted business may have grounds to seek compensation in the form of the profits it would have earned had everything just gone smoothly. In order to successfully win (or defend against) any such claim, one must compile and analyze certain types of documents and information, understand and apply appropriate methodologies, and present their case in a manner consistent with that which the court or trier of fact requires. In this webinar, the expert panel discusses the circumstances that warrant lost profits claims, key considerations for both the claimant and defendant, and how such claims will ultimately be evaluated.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/nuts-bolts-of-lost-profit-cases-2021/
Loan Workout 101 for Financial InstitutionsLibby Bierman
Ancin Cooley, founder and principal of Synergy Bank Consulting and Synergy Credit Union Consulting, will present on managing non-performing loans. Synergy provides risk management services to financial institutions. Cooley has over 10 years of experience, including as a regulatory examiner at the OCC. The presentation will cover warning signs of troubled loans, establishing transfer criteria to non-performing classifications, addressing documentation errors, using dunning letters, types of loan guarantees, analyzing and separating non-performing loans into groups, and assessing business problems and cash flow. The presentation is intended to help financial institutions better manage troubled and non-performing loans.
Trinan specializes in commercial loan workouts and debt restructuring. They negotiate modifications to loan terms like interest rates, payment amounts, and maturity dates. Trinan has experience with many types of commercial loans. Their team of executives with banking experience lead each negotiation. Through industry relationships, they have a high success rate in resolving workouts.
Intellectual Property Valuation Case studyMike Blake
This document provides an overview and case study of valuing intellectual property, specifically a pending patent application for a new 3D printing technology. It discusses key considerations in valuing early-stage intellectual property including determining the market potential and commercial viability of the technology. It then presents the valuation analyst's use of the income approach to estimate the fair value of the pending patent application at $1,900, considering projected revenues, royalty rates, development costs and other factors. It also briefly discusses determining reasonable royalty rates for patent infringement cases.
BrundidgeStanger-IAM-magazine-2015QualityRankingDavid Lee
The document discusses recent initiatives by the USPTO and Supreme Court rulings that have increased focus on patent quality in the US. It summarizes a study ranking the top US law firms in terms of the quality of patents they obtain based on an "Ocean Tomo Rating" score. Firms specializing in specific industries like healthcare and IT dominate the rankings. The popularity of new post-issuance review procedures introduced by the America Invents Act have further intensified scrutiny on patent quality and changed how patent applications are drafted.
The document discusses recent initiatives by the USPTO and Supreme Court that have increased focus on patent quality in the US. It summarizes a study ranking the top US law firms in terms of the quality of patents they obtain based on an "Ocean Tomo Rating" score. Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner ranked first overall and in most industry categories. The popularity of new post-issuance review procedures introduced by the America Invents Act, such as inter partes reviews, have further intensified scrutiny of patent quality and changed how patent applications are drafted.
BrundidgeStanger-IAM-magazine-2015QualityRankingMisung Lee
The document discusses recent initiatives by the USPTO and Supreme Court that have increased focus on patent quality in the US. It summarizes data from a study ranking the top US law firms in terms of the quality of patents they obtain based on an "Ocean Tomo Rating" score. Firms specializing in specific industries like healthcare and IT dominate the rankings. The popularity of new post-issuance review procedures introduced by the AIA, like inter partes reviews, have further intensified the spotlight on patent quality and changed how patent applications are drafted to withstand scrutiny.
2015 Patent Litigation Study: A change in patentee fortunesPwC
Intellectual property matters have an indisputable link to competitive advantage. Our 2015 Patent Litigation Study provides a comprehensive analysis from a database of US patent infringement actions, which includes data from 1995 through 2014. The observations and trends identified in our analysis can help executives, legislators, and litigators assess their patent enforcement or defense strategies.
The document discusses the USPTO's Track One Prioritized Examination process, which allows patent applications to be expedited for an additional fee. It notes that the average time to obtain a patent through this process is less than six months. The author provides an example where they obtained notices of allowance for two clients' applications in under seven months. The process requires electronic filing and limits the number of claims and independent claims. It guarantees the application will be examined within four months if all requirements are met. The program allows applicants to secure patent protection faster and gain a competitive advantage.
SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) invest most of their resources in R&D to produce new technologies. They take higher risks than larger companies, who in contrast focus their R&D efforts on incremental innovations.
Yet, SMEs mostly fail to protect the value they create with patents. When they do, these patents have in general very poor quality and do not adequately protect their core markets. Lastly, SMEs are underserved in terms of legal representation and understandably so: outside law firms tend to find it difficult to work with SMEs, let alone getting paid for their services.
There is a mismatch between the patent value creation potential of SMEs on one hand, and what they actually produce.
PGRT Basics (Series: IP 301 Post-Grant Review Trials 2020)Financial Poise
This segment will discuss the statutory and procedural background of post-grant review proceedings. It will discuss the types of proceedings available and provide a high-level discussion of how the proceedings are conducted.
To view the accompanying webinar, go to: https://www.financialpoise.com/financial-poise-webinars/pgrt-basics-2020/
Presentation before the International Intellectual Property Society
Conrad Wong
Attorney-Advisor, China Team
Office of Policy and International Affairs
United States Patent and Trademark Office USPTO
May 16, 2019
Breakout Session: Head for the Exit: How to Structure, Negotiate & Close the ...Healthegy
Presentation by McDermott Will & Emery at Medtech Conference 2016.
Participant:
Kristian Werling, Partner – McDermott Will & Emery, LLP
Powered by:
Healthegy
For more healthcare innovation
Visit us at Healthegy.com
Studying the Impact of eBay on Injunctive Relief in Patent Cases Jay Kesan
The document discusses a study analyzing the impact of the 2006 Supreme Court eBay v. MercExchange decision on the granting of injunctive relief in patent cases. The study finds that after eBay:
1) The rate of both preliminary and permanent injunctions sought and granted decreased significantly, especially for non-practicing entities (NPEs).
2) NPEs saw larger decreases than practicing entities (PEs) in the rate of injunctions sought and granted both before and after eBay.
3) While injunctions are still granted in the majority of cases where they are sought, eBay made them more difficult to obtain, particularly for NPEs.
Methods to improve Freedom to Operate analysisDauverC
This document discusses improving freedom to operate (FTO) analysis through comprehensive risk assessment and targeted patent searching. It provides an overview of patent filing trends, litigation statistics in key regions like the US and Europe, and a business case study on conducting an FTO analysis for a proposed fuel tank product. New semantic search technologies available in tools like PatentOptimizer can help enable more precise and recall patent searches to better inform FTO evaluations.
This segment will discuss the statutory and procedural background of post-grant review proceedings. It will discuss the types of proceedings available and provide a high-level discussion of how the proceedings are conducted.
Part of the webinar series:
IP-301 POST-GRANT REVIEW TRIALS 2022
See more at https://www.financialpoise.com/webinars/
The document analyzes a company's workers compensation claims department performance using data and predictive analytics. It summarizes the results of an audit of over 800 claims which found issues with data integrity, initial investigations, and reserving practices. The analysis identified groups like female workers that were under-reserved and high cost occupational groups. It recommends the company focus on improving processes in areas like claim intake, investigations, reserving, and expense management to better measure and improve performance.
C:\Documents And Settings\User\Desktop\Wipo Smes Sha 04 10 Basireesha
This document discusses several key issues related to intellectual property (IP) in outsourcing and international trade. It addresses the following main points:
1. Outsourcing involves transferring non-core functions to third-party vendors in order to improve efficiency and reduce costs. However, it also carries risks related to disclosure of proprietary information, ownership of IP developed during the outsourcing process, and potential infringement of third-party IP rights.
2. When outsourcing, companies must implement protections for trade secrets such as non-disclosure agreements, classification of confidential information, and monitoring. Contracts should also clarify ownership of newly developed IP and responsibilities for indemnification.
3. Additional considerations for outs
The document summarizes a keynote address given by Colleen Chien comparing patent quality mechanisms between the United States and European patent systems. It finds that the US system receives many more patent applications, has a higher grant rate, but a much lower renewal rate than the European system. This results in over 10 times as many US patents remaining in force compared to equivalent European patents. The differences are driven by factors like examination practices, applicant incentives, and relative costs of obtaining and maintaining patents between the two systems. Chien proposes designing patent system mechanisms that better distinguish between patents that are likely to be enforced from those intended only for defensive purposes.
This document summarizes key intellectual property (IP) issues related to outsourcing. It discusses why outsourcing is common, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises. It also outlines merits and risks of outsourcing as well as considerations for managing risks. The document then examines IP issues that can arise, such as ownership of IP developed during outsourcing agreements and protecting confidential information. It concludes by emphasizing the importance of thorough termination provisions in outsourcing contracts.
Advanced Practice Under the American Invents Act (AIA).
Post Issuance Proceedings.
Kill Rates.
IPX.
Review Proceedings.
Insights and Lessons.
Trial Timeline.
What's Next?
This document provides an overview of negotiating deals and partnerships in the biotech industry. It summarizes two case studies of companies that partnered assets: Seattle Genetics partnered an antibody-drug conjugate for lymphoma with Millennium Pharmaceuticals, receiving an upfront payment and being responsible for US/Canada commercialization; Amylin partnered multiple obesity drugs with Takeda, with Takeda obtaining global commercial rights and Amylin retaining development control and co-promotion options. The document discusses deal structures, timelines, considerations and contract basics for biotech partnerships.
Similar to What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery” (20)
Reusing Natural Experiments; Presentation by Michael-Paul JamesMichael-Paul James
Reusing Natural Experiments
Paper by Davidson Heath, Matthew C. Ringgenberg, Mehrdad Samadi, and Ingrid M. Werner
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Multiple Testing Corrections
Family-Wise Error Rate
FDR and FDP
Bootstrap
Simulations
Empirical Settings
Randomized Control Trial
Staggered Introductions
IV Regression
Regression Discontinuity Design
Compustate and CRSP Outcomes
Simulated True Treatment Effects
Comparing Multiple Testing Frameworks
Adjusted t-statistic Critical Values
Evaluating Existing Evidence
Business Combination Laws
Regulation SHO
Sequencing Tests
Results
Discussion
Caveats
p-Values are Only One Input for Inference
What is the Right Burden of Proof?
Improving Inference when Reusing a Natural Experiment
Corroborating Evidence
State and Test Causal Channels
Compound Exclusion Restrictions
Presentation on Institutional Shareholders And Corporate Social ResponsibilityMichael-Paul James
Institutional Shareholders And Corporate Social Responsibility
Paper by Tao Chen, Hui Dong, Chen Lin
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Institutional shareholders induce corporate managers to invest more in social goodness (increase CSR rating)
Two quasi-natural experiments
Random assignment in May demonstrates that higher institutional ownership motivates higher CSR ratings
Exogenous shocks in other industries demonstrate distracted investors lead to lower CSR ratings reducing social responsibility
Three additional measure reinforce distraction results
Voice is an important method to motivate CSR investments
Return Decomposition
By Long Chen and Xinlei Zhao
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Directly modeling discount rate news and backing out cash flow news
adds residual news to the latter
○ The method has led to erroneous conclusions:
■ Larger relative DR variance
■ Value stocks earn higher returns due to higher βCF
■ βCF is more important than total βtotal
○ DR news cannot be accurately estimated (low predictive power)
and backed out CF news inherits large misspecification error of DR
○ Modeled Treasury bonds reveals higher CF variance with no real CF
risk
○ Minor changes in predictive variables produce opposite results
Directly modeling cash flow news, discount rate news, and residual
○ Value firms have both lower modeled CF betas and DR betas, but
higher residual betas, indicating that the results in the current
literature are driven by the residual news.
Presentation on Predicting Excess Stock Returns Out of Sample: Can Anything B...Michael-Paul James
Predicting Excess Stock Returns
Out of Sample: Can Anything Beat
the Historical Average?
Paper by John Y. Campbell & Samuel B. Thompson
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
● Many variables are correlated with subsequent stock returns
● In the previous research, historical average stock returns have
outperformed most contenders
● Predictor variables in this paper outperformed out-of-sample once
restrictions were imposed on coefficient signs and return forecast
○ Small explanatory power, meaningful economic significance
● Although not fully described asset prices, out-of-sample performance
improves.
● Models generate meaningful utility gains for mean-variance investors
● Data accessibility and improvement may prove more valuable than
theoretical restrictions
Bad Beta, Good Beta
By John Y. Campbell And Tuomo Vuolteenaho
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Cash flow and discount rate betas estimates stock market risk factors
more efficiently than CAPM over time.
○ Cash flow news
■ Stock returns covariance with cash flows news
○ Discount rate news
■ Stock returns covariance with discount rate news
● “Bad” cash flow beta (risk) demands higher premiums than “good”
discount rate beta (risk).
● Value and small stocks have higher cash flow betas than growth and
large stocks on average.
● High average returns on value and small stocks are appropriate
compensation for risk, not an unrealized benefit to ownership.
● Overweighting small and value stocks benefit low risk aversion equity
investors
● Underweighting small and value stocks benefit high risk aversion
equity investors
● Model offers strong explanatory power in the cross section of asset
returns with theoretical values
● ICAPM outperforms the CAPM in empirical research
Presentation of Input Specificity and the Propagation of Idiosyncratic Shocks...Michael-Paul James
Input Specificity and the Propagation of Idiosyncratic Shocks in Production Networks by Jean-Noel Barrot and Julien Sauvagnat
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Firm level shocks propagate in production networks
● Customers drop 2-3% in sales growth when suppliers suffer a disaster
○ 25% drop in sales growth with respect to sample average of 10%
○ Temporary effect, without prior trends
○ Losses only affect active customer-supplier relationships
○ Larger effect when supplier produces differentiated goods with
high R&D, more patents, thus difficult to replace
○ Customer suffers 1% drop in market equity value
● Other suppliers experience drop in sales growth after another supplier
is hit, when customers are shared.
● Input disruptions are not compensated, resulting in sector wide losses
● Input specificity is a key determinant of the propagation of
idiosyncratic shocks in the economy
Presentation by Michael-Paul James on Passive Investors, Not Passive Owners by Ian R. Appel, Todd A. Gormley, Donald B. Keim.
Summary:
Study exploits exogenous variation in passive institutional ownership around the cutoff of Russell 1000 & 2000 inclusion. They find that passively managed mutual funds play important role in stock ownership, corporate behavior, and corporate policy.
The Log-Linear Return Approximation, Bubbles, and PredictabilityMichael-Paul James
Presentation by Michael-Paul James on The Log-Linear Return Approximation, Bubbles, and Predictability by Tom Engsted, Thomas Q. Pedersen, and Carsten Tanggaard
Competition and Bias by Harrison Hong and Marcin KacperczykMichael-Paul James
Competition and Bias
Paper by Harrison Hong and Marcin Kacperczyk
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Treatment effect: a decrease in analyst covering increases optimism bias one year after the merger relative to control.
-Evidence for competition reduction bias
-Larger bias impact for stocks with less coverage
Presentation on Social Collateral
Paper by Ha Diep-Nguyen and Huong Dang
Presented by Michael-Paul James
Paper uses an experimental design to test the impact of social image on repayment behavior
Presentation on Bank Quality, Judicial Efficiency, and Loan Repayment Delays ...Michael-Paul James
Presentation on Bank Quality, Judicial Efficiency,
and Loan Repayment Delays in Italy. Paper by Fabio Schiantarelli, Massimiliano Stacchini, and Philip E. Strahan. Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Presentation on Rhetoric, Reality, and Reputation: Do CSR and Political Lobby...Michael-Paul James
Presentation by Michael-Paul James on "Rhetoric, Reality, and Reputation: Do CSR and Political Lobbying Protect Shareholder Wealth against Environmental Lawsuits?" Paper by Chelsea Liu , Chee Seng Cheong, and Ralf Zurbruegg
Research Paper Presentation on Asset Redeployability, Liquidation Value, and ...Michael-Paul James
"Asset Redeployability, Liquidation Value, and Endogenous Capital Structure Heterogeneity"
Paper by Antonio E. Bernardo, Alex Fabisiak, and Ivo Welch
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Research Presentation on Reserve Management and Audit Committee Characteristi...Michael-Paul James
"Reserve Management and Audit Committee Characteristics: Evidence From U.S. Property–Liability Insurance Companies"
Paper by Wen-Yen Hsu, Yenyu (Rebecca) Huang, Gene Lai
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
Presentation on Property–Liability Insurer Reserve Error: Motive, Manipulatio...Michael-Paul James
The document summarizes a research paper that examines hypotheses for property-liability insurer reserve errors. It analyzes two measurements of reserve error and tests four main hypotheses from the literature - taxes, income smoothing, rate regulation incentives, and financial weakness. The results found that the choice of reserve error measurement impacted the findings. There was little evidence for income smoothing. Evidence supported overreserving for tax purposes under one measurement but not the other. Rate regulation incentives were supported. Financial weakness was linked to underreserving rather than deception.
Tax Deductibility of Premiums Paid to Captive Insurers: A Risk Reduction Appr...Michael-Paul James
Presentation by Michael-Paul James on The Tax Deductibility of
Premiums Paid to Captive Insurers: A Risk Reduction Approach
Li-Ming Han, and Gene C. Lai
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
63662490260Kalyan chart, satta matta matka 143, satta matka jodi fix , matka boss OTC 420, Indian Satta, India matka, matka ank, spbossmatka, online satta matka game play, live satta matka results, fix fix fix satta namber, free satta matka games, Kalyan matka jodi chart, Kalyan weekly final anl matka 420
KALYAN CHART SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
The Steadfast and Reliable Bull: Taurus Zodiac Signmy Pandit
Explore the steadfast and reliable nature of the Taurus Zodiac Sign. Discover the personality traits, key dates, and horoscope insights that define the determined and practical Taurus, and learn how their grounded nature makes them the anchor of the zodiac.
High-Quality IPTV Monthly Subscription for $15advik4387
Experience high-quality entertainment with our IPTV monthly subscription for just $15. Access a vast array of live TV channels, movies, and on-demand shows with crystal-clear streaming. Our reliable service ensures smooth, uninterrupted viewing at an unbeatable price. Perfect for those seeking premium content without breaking the bank. Start streaming today!
https://rb.gy/f409dk
Ellen Burstyn: From Detroit Dreamer to Hollywood Legend | CIO Women MagazineCIOWomenMagazine
In this article, we will dive into the extraordinary life of Ellen Burstyn, where the curtains rise on a story that's far more attractive than any script.
Prescriptive analytics BA4206 Anna University PPTFreelance
Business analysis - Prescriptive analytics Introduction to Prescriptive analytics
Prescriptive Modeling
Non Linear Optimization
Demonstrating Business Performance Improvement
During the budget session of 2024-25, the finance minister, Nirmala Sitharaman, introduced the “solar Rooftop scheme,” also known as “PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana.” It is a subsidy offered to those who wish to put up solar panels in their homes using domestic power systems. Additionally, adopting photovoltaic technology at home allows you to lower your monthly electricity expenses. Today in this blog we will talk all about what is the PM Surya Ghar Muft Bijli Yojana. How does it work? Who is eligible for this yojana and all the other things related to this scheme?
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
SATTA MATKA DPBOSS KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART KALYAN MATKA MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA TIPS SATTA MATKA MATKA COM MATKA PANA JODI TODAY BATTA SATKA MATKA PATTI JODI NUMBER MATKA RESULTS MATKA CHART MATKA JODI SATTA COM INDIA SATTA MATKA MATKA TIPS MATKA WAPKA ALL MATKA RESULT LIVE ONLINE MATKA RESULT KALYAN MATKA RESULT DPBOSS MATKA 143 MAIN MATKA KALYAN MATKA RESULTS KALYAN CHART
Satta Matka Dpboss Kalyan Matka Results Kalyan Chart
What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery”
1. What Is a Patent Worth?
Evidence from the U.S.
Patent “Lottery”
Paper by Joan Farre-Mensa, Deepak Hegde, Alexander Ljungqvist
Presentation by Michael-Paul James
1
2. Table of contents
Introduction Setting & Data
international setting and data, patent
examination process, timing
considerations, patent data and sample
selection, data on firm outcomes
story, questions, context, issues
Patents & Capital
how do patents facilitate access to
capital? variation in vc funding round,
variation in prior entrepreneurial
experience, variation in startup
agglomeration across states, variation
across industries, subsequent patent
applications
Driving Effects
what drives the real effects of patents?
vc funding, fundraising in the ipo
market, loans from banks and
specialized lenders
01 02
04 05
Real Effects
real effects of patent grants, empirical
setup & identification challenge,
identification strategy & identifying
assumptions, threats to identification,
empirical results, external validity
Summary
key points and takeaways
03
06
2
4. Patents
● Awards monopoly rights
○ Defensive shields in litigation suits
○ Bargaining chips in licensing negotiations
○ Signaling device to attract customers.
○ Costly to enforce
○ Tax imposition on follow-on inventors
● Innate value
○ Incremental economic benefit accrued through the right of
excluding others above the earnings if no patent were granted.
● Alternatives
○ Trade secrets
4
Michael-Paul James
5. Dataset Novelty
● US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) allows access to rejected
patents, not previously available.
● Five outcome variables
○ Growth in sales and employment
■ Dun & Bradstreet’s NETS (National Establishment Time Series) database
○ Follow-on patenting and patent citations
■ USPTO’s patent database
○ Pledging of patent applications as collateral to raise debt
■ USPTO’s patent assignment database (Documents ownership transfers)
○ Venture funding
■ VentureXpert (VC funding events)
○ Fundraising by startups through initial public offerings (IPOs)
■ VentureXpert
■ Thomson-Reuters’s SDC database (IPO data)
5
Michael-Paul James
6. Exogenous Variation
● Instrumental Variable
○ US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) review process.
■ USPTO randomly assigns applications in each field (art unit) to
examiners based on characteristics of the underlying invention
■ Examiners vary in leniency with some significantly more likely
to approve patent applications.
● Assignment to lenient examiners is equivalent to winning
the patent lottery.
6
Michael-Paul James
7. Summary Results of First Patent
● Approved first patents for startups versus those not approved.
○ Increase growth in employment by 54.5%
■ Approximately 16 more employees over 5 years
○ Increase growth in sales by 79.5%
■ Approximately 110.6 million more in sales over 5 years
○ Increase number of subsequent patents granted by 56.5%
○ Increase number of citations per subsequent patent by 33%
■ Citations: references defining technology already known within
patents or literature which shaped the patent.
○ Funding:
■ Increase acquiring VC funding by 47% over 3 years.
■ Increase loan availability by collateralizing the patent by 76%
■ Increasing opportunities to raise funds through an IPO by 128%
7
Michael-Paul James
8. Summary Results of Subsequent Patents
● Second and third patents
○ Little evidence of substantive economic impact
○ Little evidence of additional funding opportunities
○ Second increases number of subsequent patents granted by 49.8%
8
Michael-Paul James
9. Contribution
● Adds to literature on startups and the value of patents to funding
innovation.
● Causal evidence of patents impact on funding particularly with high
information friction.
● Identification strategy of quasi random assignment to examiners with
varying leniency particularly for 20% of the sample impacted by the
patent examiner lottery.
○ Median examiner grants 61.5% of patents
○ 75 percentile grants 11.8% points higher than 25 percentile.
● Uncertain statements about overall welfare but contributes to the
benefits to those obtaining patents.
● Creates a connection between the patent itself as opposed to the
underlying invention to positive economic effects.
9
Michael-Paul James
10. Setting & Data
02
international setting and data, patent examination process, timing
considerations, patent data and sample selection, data on firm outcomes
10
11. Patent Examination Process
● Patents assigned to appropriate art unit for review with a median
assignment time of 0.7 years.
○ Art units specialize in a narrowly defined technology field.
○ 900+ art units, 13,000+ examiners
○ Art units range in size with a median number of 13 examiners with
the largest at 100+ examiners
○ Legal criteria: Novelty, usefulness, and nonobviousness.
● After assignment, first action decision is made generally in on year.
○ first action decision: preliminary ruling on patent validity by
examiner.
● Final decision determined 1.2 years later on average
● Total average time to final decision: 2.9 years
11
Michael-Paul James
12. Restrictions on Data
● Initial filtering
○ Include only incorporated applicants based on the US.
○ Omit not-for-profit firms
○ Exclude publicly traded firms
○ Exclude subsidiaries of other firms
● Determining startups
○ Focus on firms with reduced filing fees satisfying the small
business entity qualification
○ Exclude firms who have filed a patent application in the previous
25 years.
○ Include only firms who have filed a patent between the years of
2001-2009 with a final decision by 2013)
12
Michael-Paul James
13. Table
1:
Summary
StatisticsTable I: Summary Statistics
The table reports summary statistics for the firms in our sample of first-time patent applicants (or “startups”), broken down by whether their first application is
approved or rejected. Data on age, employment, and sales are available only for those startups that can be matched to the National Establishment Times Series
(NETS) database. For variable definitions and details on their construction, see the Appendix.
Firms Whose First Patent Application Is . . .
Approved Rejected
No. firms 22,084 12,131
% of firms 64.54% 35.46%
Scope: number of allowed independent claims Mean 3.2 0.0
Median 3.0 0.0
SD 2.6 0.0
Panel A: Prefiling Characteristics
Age at first patent filing (years) Median 2.0 2.0
Employees at filing date Mean 29.6 29.0
Median 8.0 8.0
SD 61.9 61.2
Sales at filing date ($ million) Mean 4.3 4.2
Median 0.8 0.7
SD 9.9 10.0
Prepatent-filing employment growth (%) Mean 16.2 16.0
SD 68.7 68.1
Prepatent-filing sales growth (%) Mean 20.1 18.4
SD 87.9 83.8
13
Michael-Paul James
14. Table
1:
Summary
StatisticsTable I: Summary Statistics Continued...
Panel B: Subsequent Growth in Employment and Sales
Firms Whose First Patent Application Is . . .
Approved Rejected
Employment growth after first-action decision on the firm’s first patent application (in %), measured over the following . . .
. . . One year Mean 6.5 0
SD 50 48
. . . Three years Mean 19.2 2.5
SD 122.2 111.5
. . . Five years Mean 24.7 1.5
SD 159.6 127.1
Sales growth after first-action decision on the firm’s first patent application (in %), measured over the following . . .
. . . One year Mean 11 2.7
SD 73.6 66.7
. . . Three years Mean 34 12.2
SD 183.7 162.6
. . . Five years Mean 50 16.3
SD 255.7 211.6
14
Michael-Paul James
15. Table
1:
Summary
StatisticsTable I: Summary Statistics Continued...
Panel C: Subsequent Patenting: Patent Applications Filed after First-Action Decision on Firm’s First Application
Firms Whose First Patent Application Is . . .
Approved Rejected
No. subsequent patent applications Mean 3.1 1.2
SD 11.7 5.7
No. subsequent approved patents Mean 1.8 0.5
SD 7.4 2.7
Approval rate of subsequent patent applications (%) 70.5 47.9
Total citations to all subsequent patent applications Mean 8.3 2.2
SD 77.8 26.6
Average citations-per-patent to subsequent approved patents Mean 2 1.5
SD 3.8 3
Panel D: Subsequent VC Funding and IPOs
% of startups that raise VC funding after first action 8 5.6
% of startups that go public after first action 0.9 0.6
15
Michael-Paul James
16. Table
1:
Summary
StatisticsTable I: Summary Statistics Continued...
Panel E: Subsequent Pledges of Patents as Collateral
Firms Whose First Patent Application Is . . .
Approved Rejected
% of startups that pledged their first patent application as collateral after first-action decision, measured after the following . . .
. . . One year Mean 1.3 0.9
. . . Three years Mean 4 2.1
. . . Five years Mean 6.6 2.6
% of startups without VC funding that pledged their first patent application as collateral after first-action decision, measured after
the following . . .
. . . One year Mean 0.9 0.7
. . . Three years Mean 3.1 1.6
. . . Five years Mean 5.1 2
16
Michael-Paul James
17. Real Effects
03
real effects of patent grants, empirical setup & identification challenge,
identification strategy & identifying assumptions, threats to identification,
empirical results, external validity
17
18. Panel Regression Equation for 2SLS
Equation 1
● j examiners
● α art units
● τ application years
● t first action decision year
● k 1,2,3,4,5 years
● Xijat
headquarter (HQ)-state fixed effects to control for geographical differences in outcomes
● β average treatment effect (ATE) of being granted a patent on firm outcomes
● νaτ
art-unit-by-application-year fixed effects
Primary concern: differences in outcomes reflect effects of granting a patent and not the quality
of the invention.
Solution: Lottery like features of assignment in that applications are quasi randomly assigned and
examiners differ systematically in their propensity to approve patents.
18
Michael-Paul James
20. Panel Regression Equation for 2SLS
Equation 3: Identification Strategy Validation
● j examiners
● α art units
● τ application years
● t first action decision year
● Xijat
headquarter (HQ)-state fixed effects to control for geographical differences in outcomes
● θ average treatment effect (ATE) of examiner assignment on being granted a patent
● νaτ
art-unit-by-application-year fixed effects
Exposing threats to identification
Note on interpretation: Coefficient estimate for θ in column (1) implies that each percentage-point
increase in an examiner’s prior approval rate leads to a 0.67 percentage-point increase in the
probability that a startup patent she reviews is approved (p < 0.001)
20
Michael-Paul James
22. Table
II
:
Examiner
Leniency:
First-Stage
Results
Table II: Examiner Leniency: First-Stage Results
First Patent Application Approved?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
IV: patent examiner approval rate 0.670*** 0.669*** 0.674*** 0.682*** 0.692*** 0.689***
0.017 0.021 0.022 0.019 0.022 0.033
Examiner characteristics: Continued...
Examiner grade GS-12 -0.020
0.021
Examiner grade GS-13 -0.014
0.021
Examiner grade GS-14 0.018
0.023
Examiner grade GS-15 -0.051
0.034
Fixed effects
Art unit x year Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HQ state Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tech subclass x year No No No No Yes Yes
Diagnostics
R2 25.70% 27.80% 28.20% 25.70% 42.10% 42.20%
F-test: IV = 0 1,504.1*** 1,062.6*** 967.7*** 1,316.0*** 966.7*** 440.7***
No. of observations (firms) 34,215 21,564 20,207 29,001 28,299 28,294
22
Michael-Paul James
23. Table
III
:
Examiner
Leniency:
Instrument
Validity
Table III: Examiner Leniency: Instrument Validity
IV: Patent Examiner Approval Rate
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Applicant Characteristics
ln(Employees at filing date) 0.001
standard errors 0.002
ln(1 + Sales at filing date) 0.000
0.001
Employment growth during year prior to filing date 0.002
0.004
Sales growth during year prior to filing date 0.000
0.003
Application characteristics
ln(# independent claims in application) 0.002
0.002
Examiner characteristics
ln(Examiner experience) 0.039***
0.004
Examiner grade GS-9 0.038***
0.007
Examiner grade GS-11 0.080***
0.009
23
Michael-Paul James
24. Table
III
:
Examiner
Leniency:
Instrument
Validity
Table III: Examiner Leniency: Instrument Validity
IV: Patent Examiner Approval Rate
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Examiner grade GS-12 0.131***
0.010
Examiner grade GS-13 0.191***
0.011
Examiner grade GS-14 0.226***
0.012
Examiner grade GS-15 0.197***
0.020
Approval by foreign patent office
European Patent Office -0.005
0.013
Japanese Patent Office 0.014
0.029
Fixed effects
Art unit x year Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HQ state Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tech subclass x year No No No Yes Yes Yes
Diagnostics
R2
58.60% 59.10% 57.10% 80.40% 85.40% 92.40%
No. of observations (firms) 20,151 17,546 29,001 28,294 2,345 568
24
25. Table
IV
:
Employment
Growth,
Sales
Growth,
Survival
Table IV: How Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Employment Growth, Sales Growth, and Survival?
One Year Two Years Three Years Four Years Five Years
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Panel A: Employment Growth
First patent application approved 0.061* 0.228*** 0.333*** 0.489*** 0.545***
0.033 0.061 0.093 0.132 0.149
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test (Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic) 1,063.6*** 1,063.6*** 879.3*** 621.6*** 490.2***
Unconditional mean of dep. variable 4.3% 10.2% 13.8% 17.2% 17.4%
No. of observations (firms) 21,564 21,564 18,745 15,417 12,655
Panel B: Sales Growth
First patent application approved 0.096** 0.276*** 0.512*** 0.796*** 0.795***
0.048 0.082 0.137 0.208 0.246
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,065.0*** 1,064.6*** 880.1*** 622.1*** 493.2***
Unconditional mean of dep. variable 8.2% 18.3% 27.0% 36.5% 40.9%
No. of observations (firms) 21,530 21,537 18,729 15,410 12,651
Panel C: Survival
First patent application approved 0.010 0.031* 0.046** 0.024 0.032
0.013 0.018 0.023 0.031 0.039
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,063.6*** 1,063.6*** 879.3*** 621.6*** 490.2***
Unconditional mean of dep. variable 95.8% 91.2% 86.8% 83.8% 79.7%
No. of observations (firms) 21,564 21,564 18,745 15,417 12,655 25
26. Figure
2
:
Effect
of
patent
grants
on
startup
growth Figure 2. The effect of
patent grants on startup
growth. The figure plots the
estimated effect of patent
approval on employment
growth (Panel A) and sales
growth (Panel B) over the
five years following the
first-action decision on a
startup’s first patent
application. Specifically, the
solid line shows the
estimated patent approval
effect obtained by
estimating equation (1) by
2SLS separately over
horizons from one to five
years after the first-action
date. We use the approval
rate of the examiner
reviewing each patent
application as an instrument
for the likelihood that the
application is approved. The
dashed lines show 95%
confidence intervals.
26
27. Figure
2
:
Effect
of
patent
grants
on
startup
growth Figure 2. The effect of
patent grants on startup
growth. The figure plots the
estimated effect of patent
approval on employment
growth (Panel A) and sales
growth (Panel B) over the
five years following the
first-action decision on a
startup’s first patent
application. Specifically, the
solid line shows the
estimated patent approval
effect obtained by
estimating equation (1) by
2SLS separately over
horizons from one to five
years after the first-action
date. We use the approval
rate of the examiner
reviewing each patent
application as an instrument
for the likelihood that the
application is approved. The
dashed lines show 95%
confidence intervals.
27
28. Table
V
:
Effects
on
Subsequent
Innovation Table V: How Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Subsequent Innovation?
(1) 56.5% = e0.448
-1
(2) 42.3% = e0.353
-1
(3) 27.6% = e0.244
-1
(4) 60.3% = e0.472
-1
(5) 33.0% = e0.285
-1
Log (1 +
Subsequent
patent
applications)
Log (1 +
Subsequent
approved
patents)
Approval rate of
subsequent
patent
applications
Log (1 + Total
citations to
subsequent patent
applications)
Log (1 + Avg.
citations-per-patent
to subsequent
approved patents)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Follow-On Innovation
First patent application approved 0.448*** 0.353*** 0.244*** 0.472*** 0.285***
0.039 0.030 0.043 0.049 0.094
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,504.1*** 1,504.1*** 570.5*** 1,504.0*** 305.0***
Uncond. mean of nonlogged dep. var. 2.4 1.3 65.80% 6.1 1.9
No. of observations (firms) 34,215 34,215 12,595 34,214 9,793
Table V: How Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Subsequent Innovation? The table reports results of estimating equation (1) to
examine how the approval of a startup’s first patent application affects the startup’s follow-on innovation. Data on subsequent applications
come from the USPTO’s internal databases and include all applications that receive a final decision through December 31, 2013. Column (3)
includes only those startups filing at least one patent application after the first-action decision on the startup’s first patent application and for
which we can measure the approval rate of subsequent applications. Column (5) includes only those startups with at least one subsequent
patent approval and for which we can measure the average number of citations per patent to subsequently approved patents. We measure
citations over the five years following each patent application’s public disclosure date, which is typically 18 months after the application’s filing
date. For variable definitions and details on their construction, see the Appendix. All specifications are estimated by 2SLS and include art-unit-
by-year and headquarter-state fixed effects. We use the approval rate of the examiner reviewing each patent application as an instrument for the
likelihood that the application is approved. The weak-instrument test uses the Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic. Heteroskedasticity- consistent
standard errors clustered at the art unit level are reported in italics below the coefficient estimates. ***, **, and * denote significance at the 1%, 5%,
and 10% level (two-sided), respectively. 28
29. Table
VI
:
Effects
of
Second
Patent
Table VI The Effect of a Startup’s Second Patent Application
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
One Year Two Years Three Years Four Years Five Years
Panel A: Employment Growth
Second patent application approved 0.108* 0.000 −0.019 0.008 −0.091
0.058 0.112 0.156 0.220 0.286
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 547.3*** 547.3*** 491.7*** 308.6*** 213.4***
Unconditional mean of dep. variable 6.2% 12.1% 16.4% 20.6% 19.8%
No. of observations (firms) 8,798 8,798 7,284 5,660 4,279
Panel B: Sales Growth
Second patent application approved 0.148 0.024 0.092 0.202 0.496
0.097 0.171 0.282 0.396 0.56
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 551.7*** 551.9*** 495.3*** 309.1*** 213.3***
Unconditional mean of dep. variable 13.1% 28.6% 41.8% 51.8% 58.9%
No. of observations (firms) 8,781 8,784 7,279 5,658 4,278
Table VI: The Effect of a Startup’s Second Patent Application. This table repeats the analyses shown in Panels A and B of Table IV and in Table
V, except that here we model the effect of the approval of a startup’s second patent application. All columns report 2SLS results using the
approval rate of the examiner reviewing the second patent application as an instrument for the likelihood that the application is approved. For
variable definitions and details on their construction, see the Appendix. All specifications include art-unit-by-year and headquarter-state fixed
effects. The weak-instrument test uses the Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic. Heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors clustered at the art
unit level are reported in italics underneath the coefficient estimates. ***, **, and * denote significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% level (two-sided),
respectively. 29
30. Table
VI
:
Effects
of
Second
Patent
Table VI: The Effect of a Startup’s Second Patent Application. This table repeats the analyses shown in Panels A and B of Table IV and in Table
V, except that here we model the effect of the approval of a startup’s second patent application. All columns report 2SLS results using the
approval rate of the examiner reviewing the second patent application as an instrument for the likelihood that the application is approved. For
variable definitions and details on their construction, see the Appendix. All specifications include art-unit-by-year and headquarter-state fixed
effects. The weak-instrument test uses the Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic. Heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors clustered at the art
unit level are reported in italics underneath the coefficient estimates. ***, **, and * denote significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% level (two-sided),
respectively.
Table VI The Effect of a Startup’s Second Patent Application
Panel C: Follow-On Innovation
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(1) 64.2% = e0.496
-1
(2) 49.8% = e0.404
-1
(3) 15.1% = e0.141
-1
(4) 75.6% = e0.563
-1
Log (1 +
Subsequent
patent
applications)
Log (1 +
Subsequent
approved
patents)
Approval rate
of subsequent
patent
applications
Log (1 + Total
citations to
subsequent
patent
applications)
Log (1 + Avg.
citations-per-patent
to subsequent
approved patents)
Second patent application approved 0.496*** 0.404*** 0.141*** 0.563*** 0.052
0.08 0.062 0.053 0.094 0.096
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 768.9*** 768.9*** 276.0*** 769.0*** 211.2***
Unconditional mean of nonlogged dep. var. 4.5 2.4 66.40% 12.4 2.1
No. of observations (firms) 12,653 12,653 6,103 12,652 4,883
30
31. Driving Effects
04
what drives the real effects of patents? vc funding, fundraising in the ipo
market, loans from banks and specialized lenders
31
32. Panel Regression Equation for 2SLS
Equation 3: Identification Strategy Validation
● j examiners
● α art units
● τ application years
● t first action decision year
● Xijat
headquarter (HQ)-state fixed effects to control for geographical differences in outcomes
● β average treatment effect (ATE) of being granted a patent on access to capital
● νaτ
art-unit-by-application-year fixed effects
32
Michael-Paul James
33. Table
VII
:
Access
to
VC
Funding
&
IPO
Market
Table VII: Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Access to VC Funding and the IPO Market? The table reports results of estimating
equation (1) to examine how the approval of a startup’s first patent application affects the startup’s ability to raise funding from a VC or in the IPO
market. The dependent variable in columns (1) through (5) is an indicator set to one if the startup raises VC funding at some point in the one to
five years following the first-action decision, respectively. The dependent variable in column (6) is an indicator set to one if the startup goes
public after the first-action decision on its first patent application, and zero otherwise. All specifications are estimated by 2SLS and include
art-unit-by-year and headquarter-state fixed effects. We use the past approval rate of the examiner reviewing each patent application as an
instrument for the likelihood that the application is approved. The weak-instrument test uses the Kleibergen-Paap rk Wald F statistic.
Heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors clustered at the art unit level are reported in italics below the coefficient estimates. ***, **, and *
denote significance at the 1%, 5%, and 10% level (two-sided), respectively.
Table VII: Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Access to VC Funding and the IPO Market?
In the Next In the Next In the Next In the Next In the Next
Does the
Startup Raise
Capital in the
IPO Market?
One Year? Two Years? Three Years? Four Years? Five Years?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Following the First-Action Decision on Its First Patent Application, Does the Startup Raise VC Funding . . .
First patent application approved 0.017* 0.027*** 0.030*** 0.034*** 0.036*** 0.010**
0.009 0.01 0.01 0.011 0.011 0.005
Log (1 + No. prior VC rounds) 0.272*** 0.380*** 0.416*** 0.425*** 0.429*** 0.044***
0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.004
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,497.9*** 1,483.6*** 1,483.6*** 1,484.0*** 1,486.0*** 1,503.1***
Mean of dep. variable 3.90% 5.70% 6.40% 6.80% 7.00% 0.78%
Median no. of months from first-action to
VC round or IPO for successful applicants
5.2 8.1 9.2 10 10.3 65.7
No. of observations (firms) 34,167 34,111 34,060 34,013 33,981 34,215
33
34. Figure
3
:
Time
lag
between
decision
and
funding Figure 3. Time lag between
patent decision and VC
funding round. The figure
shows the distribution of the
time lag (in months)
between the first-action
date and the VC investment
date for successful first-time
patent applicants that go on
to raise funding from a VC.
VC funding events that take
place more than five years
after the first-action decision
are not shown.
34
35. Table
VIII
:
Access
to
Debt
Table VIII: Does a Startup’s First Patent Application Affect Access to Debt?
Following the First-Action Decision on Its First Patent Application, Does the Startup Pledge the Application as Collateral . . .
In the Next In the Next In the Next In the Next In the Next At Any Point
in the
Future?
One Year? Two Years?
Three
Years? Four Years? Five Years?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
Panel A: All Firms
First patent application approved 0.004 0.018** 0.029*** 0.039*** 0.058*** 0.086***
0.006 0.008 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.012
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,530.0*** 1,530.0*** 1,530.0*** 1,530.0*** 1,530.0*** 1,530.0***
Mean of dep. variable 1.1% 2.3% 3.3% 4.3% 5.2% 7.2%
Median no. of months from first-action to
application pledge
6 11.8 17.8 23 27.5 38.9
No. of observations (firms) 33,520 33,520 33,520 33,520 33,520 33,520
Panel B: Firms without VC Funding
First patent application approved −0.002 0.011 0.019** 0.026*** 0.044*** 0.059***
0.005 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01 0.011
Diagnostics
Weak-instrument test 1,370.7*** 1,370.7*** 1,370.7*** 1,370.7*** 1,370.7*** 1,370.7***
Mean of dep. variable 0.8% 1.7% 2.5% 3.2% 3.9% 5.5%
Median no. of months from first-action to
application pledge
5.9 12.2 18.6 23 27.5 39.6
No. of observations (firms) 31,161 31,161 31,161 31,161 31,161 31,16135
36. Patents & Capital
05
how do patents facilitate access to capital? variation in vc funding round,
variation in prior entrepreneurial experience, variation in startup
agglomeration across states, variation across industries, subsequent patent
applications
36
37. Table
IX
:
VC
Funding?
Subsample
Analyses
Table IX: How Do Patents Affect a Startup’s Access to VC Funding? Subsample Analyses
In the Three Years Following the First-Action Decision on Its First Patent Application, Does the Startup Raise . . .
Its First VC
Round?
Its Second
VC Round?
A Higher VC
Round? Any VC Funding?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Panel A: All Firms
First patent application approved 0.013* 0.455** 0.269* 0.002 0.016 0.063***
0.007 0.227 0.142 0.178 0.011 0.021
... × inexperienced founder 0.326*
0.167
... × high startup agglomeration state 0.027**
0.11
... × biochemistry -0.107***
0.035
... × other industries -0.028
0.024
Second application approved 0.028 0.091
0.019 0.057
Inexperienced founder −0.262**
0.110
High startup agglomeration state −0.016*
0.009
Diagnostics
Mean of dep. variable 1.70% 46.80% 61.50% 61.30% 6.40% 6.40% 11.30% 10.20%
Weak-instrument test 1,260.6*** 20.8*** 43.24*** 17.4*** 744.8*** 212.9*** 751.1*** 139.3***
No. of observations (startups) 31,057 406 1,306 1,086 34,060 34,060 12,455 2,782
37
39. Conclusions
● Research untangles the value of the patent over the underlying
invention
● Patent approvals have substantial, long-lasting economic impacts on
startups
○ Faster employee growth on first patent
○ Faster sales growth on first patent
○ More innovation development on first and subsequent patents
○ No exploration of negative externalities of patents
39
Michael-Paul James
40. You are Amazing
Ask me all the questions you desire. I will do my best to answer honestly
and strive to grasp your intent and creativity.
40
41. Variable Definitions
● Patent approval is an indicator set to 1 if the examiner’s final decision is to approve the
application, and to 0 otherwise.
● Firm survival during year t after the first-action decision on a firm’s first patent application is
set to 1 if the firm is matched with the NETS sample and employment (or sales) data are
available either for year t or for any year after t, and to 0 if the firm is matched with the NETS
sample and employment (or sales) data are not available for year t or for any year after t.
● Employment growth after the first-action decision on a firm’s first (or second) patent
application is employmentt+k
/employmentt
−1, where t is the first-action year and k = 1, . . . , 5.
If a firm dies and thus does not appear in NETS in year t+k, where t+k ≤ 2011 (the last year for
which we have NETS data), we set employmentt+k
= 0.
● Sales growth after the first-action decision on a firm’s first (or second) patent application is
salest+k
/salest
−1, where t is the first-action year and k = 1, . . . , 5. If a firm dies and thus does not
appear in NETS in year t+k, where t+k 2011 (the last year for which we have NETS data), we set
salest+k
= 0. Throughout the paper, we deflate sales data to U.S. dollars of 2001 purchasing
power using the GDP deflator.
● Prepatent-filing employment growth is employmentt
/employmentt−1
−1, where t is the year
that a firm’s first patent application is filed.
41
Michael-Paul James
42. Variable Definitions
● Prepatent-filing sales growth is salest
/salest−1
−1, where t is the year that a firm’s first patent
application is filed.
● No. subsequent patent applications is the number of applications with a filing date greater
than the first-action date of a firm’s first (or second) application.
● No. subsequent approved patents is the number of approved applications with a filing date
greater than the first-action date of a firm’s first (or second) application.
● Approval rate of subsequent patent applications is defined as (no. of subsequent approved
patents)/(no. of subsequent patent applications). It is defined only for firms with at least one
subsequent patent application.
● Total citations to all subsequent patent applications is the number of citations received by
all subsequent patent applications combined. (This number is zero for firms with no
subsequent applications.) We measure citations over the five years following each patent
application’s public disclosure date, which is typically 18 months after the application’s filing
date.
● Average citations-per-patent to subsequent approved patents is the average number of
citations received by those subsequent patent applications that are approved. It is defined
only for firms with at least one subsequent approved patent.
42
Michael-Paul James
43. Variable Definitions
● Examiner experience is the number of years since the examiner joined the USPTO.
● Examiner grade is the examiner’s grade according the government’s General Schedule.
Most examiners start at grade GS-7 or GS-9. Examiners at grades GS-7 through GS-11 need
senior examiners to sign off on their decisions. GS-13 examiners undergo a period during
which they have partial signatory authority and their work is subject to random checks.
Examiners at levels GS-14 and above have full signatory authority.
● Experienced founder is an indicator set to 1 if at least one of the up to five key executives of
the startup listed in Standard & Poor’s Capital IQ database previously founded a different
firm, according to the professional background provided by Capital IQ, and to 0 otherwise.
● High startup agglomeration state is an indicator set to 1 if the startup is headquartered in a
state with above-median startup agglomeration in the year of the startup’s first patent
application, and to 0 otherwise.We measure startup agglomeration using the number of
first-time patent applicants in the state.
43
Michael-Paul James
44. Variable Definitions
● Industry classification. IT startups are those whose first patent application is reviewed by an
examiner belonging to an art unit in one of the following USPTO technology centers: 21
(computer architecture, software, and information security); 24 (computer
networks,multiplex communication, video distribution, and security); 26 (communications);
or 28 (semiconductors, electrical and optical systems, and components). Biochemistry
startups are those whose first patent application is reviewed by one of the following
technology centers: 16 (biotechnology and organic chemistry); or 17 (chemical and materials
engineering). Startups belonging to other industries are those whose first patent application
is reviewed by one of the following technology centers: 36 (transportation, construction,
electronic commerce, agriculture, national security, and license & review); or 37 (mechanical
engineering, manufacturing, and products).
44
Michael-Paul James