• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.57-91
• /
• 2012

This paper investigates determinants of litigation success in the two distinctive types of patent litigations, ex-parte and inter-parte cases, which are brought in the process where a filed application becomes a valid patent right. We regress winning rates of patent applicants on the characteristics of firms, trials, patent lawyer, and patent itself, using a probit model with sample selections. The paper finds that the relative suit rate of a firm, time to be sued, changes of patent agents by applicants, and multiple agents among explanatory variables affect ex-parte reexamination and in-parte post-grant patent trials differently in the point of average marginal effects. These variables lower the probability of applicant's victory in the ex-parte cases, while they raise the probability in the inter-parte trials. However, the experience that agents represent applicants is a winning rate-increasing factor both in inter-parte and ex-parte reexamination, unexpectedly. This result cannot be applied to the entire domain of the variable, since sample selection effects are reflected in the result. The number of claim increases the winning probability of the applicant in the both types of patent litigations. This study has some limitations because it ignores the information on the legal person to which a patent agent belongs, and confined agent's experience to patent filing. We leave it future studies to investigate the effects of lawsuit experience of patent agent, and those of characteristics of the law firm to which individual patent lawyer is affiliated.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.43-66
• /
• 2009

This paper investigates what are the types and legal grounds for interim measures in the U.S. arbitration practices. The statutory ground for the interim measures is the Revised Uniform Arbitration Act. Another ground, probably the most important, is the parties' own intentions to adopt the interim measures in their arbitration proceeding. Most typical interim measures in arbitration include preliminary injuction, attachment and antisuit injunction. In the U.S ex parte motion for interim measure is rarely allowed while the Revised UNCITRAL Model Law specified an ex parte interim measure. In launching the interim measures, the US courts have demanded several requirements including imparability, probability of success and passing of the balance test. In general, the U.S. courts have properly interfered with the procedural issues in arbitration unreined but leaving the substantive issues untouched. It is believed that such interference has helped to enhance the credibility in arbitration with respect to fairness and justice.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.73-106
• /
• 2004

The UNCITRAL Arbitration Working Group began its deliberations on the topic of interim measures of protection at its thirty-second session (Vienna, 21-30 March 2000), when the Working Group expressed general support for a legal regime governing enforcement of interim measures of protection ordered by the arbitral tribunal. Also the Working Group took a preliminary analysis of whether there was a need for a uniform rule on court-ordered interim measures of protection in support of arbitration. The Working Group agreed, at its thirty-third session (Vienna, 20 November-1 December 2000), that the proposed new article to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration on enforcement of interim measures of protection (tentatively numbered article 17 bis) should include an obligation on courts to enforce interim measures if prescribed conditions were met. At its thirty-fourth session (New York, 21 May-1 Jun 2001), in addition to continuing its review of draft article 17 bis, the Working Group proceeded to consider a text revising article 17 of the UNCITRAL Model Law, which defined the scope of an arbitral tribunal's power to order interim measures and included an additional provision on the granting of interim measures on an ex parte basis. Discussions in relation to revised drafts of article 17 and 17 bis of the UNCITRAL Model Law have continued at the fortieth session ( New York, 23-27 February 2004). Article 17 of the UNCITRAL Model Law provides that the arbitral tribunal may order any party to take such interim measure of protection as the arbitral tribunal may consider necessary in respect to the subject matter of the dispute. However it may be noted that the article does not deal with enforcement of such measures.