Exhibit 1180 · Journal article
The Failed Promise of User Fees: Empirical Evidence from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
We suggest that the PTO’s reliance on prior grantees to subsidize current applicants exposes the PTO to a risk that its obligatory costs will surpass incoming fee collections.
Examines how the USPTO's reliance on fees paid after a patent is granted relates to its examination practices. The authors hypothesize and document that a budget-strained PTO extends preferential examination (higher grant rates, shorter waits) to some technologies. Lietzan (ACUS, 2024) reports an earlier Frakes and Wasserman paper (Vanderbilt Law Review 66, 2013) finding the fee schedule "biases the [US]PTO toward granting patents". Abstract read (Crossref); full text blocked (HTTP 403).
- Source
- Frakes and Wasserman, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 11(4):602-636
- Date
- December 2014
- Quoted from
- Abstract
- Grade
- Peer-reviewed
- Document
- https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12051
- Accessed
- 2026-11-10
- Cited by
- Findings citing this exhibit
- Note
- Standing note: observational with identification from fee-schedule changes; the authors say statistical bias does not settle the welfare question (Lietzan 2024, p. 406-407). A fee-dependence test at a fee-funded agency, not a fee vs appropriations comparison.