CHAPTER 8 CHEMICAL PATENTS: A COMPARITIVE ANALYSIS

Transcription

1 CHAPTER 8 CHEMICAL PATENTS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS In trying to evaluate the innovative potential of a firm, an industry, a region or a nation- --, no single perspective seems to be a sufficient guide. Rather a series of different analytical lenses gives a better overall picture. -Jane Marceau CHAPTER 8 CHEMICAL PATENTS: A COMPARITIVE ANALYSIS Need and importance of patent analysis Benefits of patent analysis Patent statistical resources Patinformatics Types of analysis Patents: A tool for S & T indicators Patent analysis Significant findings and trends from the study Emerging areas in chemical sciences 287 References

2 Chapter 8: Chemical Patents: A Comparative Analysis Patents are treated as one of the best information resources as well as indicators in S & T. Patents have occupied economic importance and value in IPR. Generally the study of patent analysis is performed for measuring the developments in a particular scientific area, contribution of countries, finding technological trends, etc. Searching patent information is a skill and its analysis is a tedious task because of its vastness. Desired and accurate useful information has to be collected and analyzed for decision making. For this purpose, the data can be collected from the secondary sources like abstracting journals, citations, patent office databases and few statistical and analytical information resources which are available for searching patent information and also for statistical analysis of patent literature. The statistical analysis support the aspects like Awareness of the development in area of research. Increasing stimulation for patenting activity. Supporting the ideas and concepts of the inventor. Valuation and commercialization of activity. Drawing the state of art. For trend analysis, technology review etc. New concept has been developed in patent analysis which is now known as Patinformatics. Patinformatics is relates to patent analysis which is carried out for various purposes including policy decisions, and mapping trends etc. This term is coined on the similar lines of the terms bioinformatics, chemoinformatics, informatics, etc 8.1 Need and Importance of Patent Analysis. The researchers need to test an idea before any substance is produced and brought to the market to see whether the same concept or idea has not already been practiced or anticipated by others. Then the researcher blocks his concept with patent protection. Patent analysis provides an overview of innovation and a method to track technological 225

3 developments. Bailey Wood (Thomson, in his presentation suggested that patent analysis deals with counting of patents; (either application or granted) to find out technological trends, geographic trends, company trends (assignee trends), experts, key players, etc. This helps in tracking the competitive intelligence, R & D strategies, key player s identification, area of contribution of the assignee and predictions in technological trends. 8.2 Benefits of Patent Analysis: Patent analysis enables to review technology and to trace the trends over a period of time. This also enables to get the geographical distribution of patents (coverage of patents in US, EP, KR, CN, DE, etc), major players (Sanofi, Astrazenica, Lilly, Takeda, Merck, Bayer, etc.), and key inventors. This type of analysis is very useful for developing future activities. It also supports technology portfolio analysis which indicates the development of products like anti-cancer drugs, enzyme inhibitors, antivirals, key inventors in the area etc. Thus patent analysis is considered as the best method for highlighting the areas for further study and collaboration. Bagheri (2004) pointed out that there is a need for analysis of patent literature which benefits the users in tracking the development of science. He has grouped the patent information analysis into 3 levels, viz.1) Strategic level, 2) Business level, and 3) Technical level Strategic Level: In strategic level of analysis, the formulation of long-term technology strategies and selection of suitable research projects according to those strategies is carried out. This task is specialized and complicated. This task requires mastery over fields of technology management like, technology forecasting, technology assessment, technology monitors, technology mapping, and formulation of technology strategy etc. This needs special kind of patent analysis entitled patent mapping through which it is possible to trace the evolution of different technologies. Technological orientations of major companies, selection of suitable partners for strategic technological partnerships, are few of the benefits. 226

4 8.2.2 Business level: Patent analysis is beneficial for the research institutes of developing countries and helps in identification of competitors and monitors key competitors in respective fields. Many companies map their competitor s patent portfolio to help in identifying research trends and gaps in research for developing new technologies. Few other benefits under this category are identification of potential licensors, analysis of technical and legal information of related patents, process for transfer of given technology before triggering the negotiation, boosting the bargaining power of buyers, etc Technical level: Patent analysis can also yield technical benefits for research institutes of developing countries. Acquiring technical information from patents and prevention of duplication is possible. In initial stages of product development, patents are a key source of information regarding latest technologies, and may act as a source of ideas for new innovations. This information may even inspire researchers with new ideas about new applications of a technology in other industries. Patent analysis is essential in chemical sciences as well as other disciplines to monitor the trends in respective area of subject. 8.3 Patent Statistical Resources: There are few organizations which generate and circulate annual patent statistics. Chemical Abstracts Service, Thomson Reuters, OECD, USPTO, EPO, WIPO, and patent offices of every country publish patent statistical data and also global trends in patent filings. These sources are useful for collecting patent information and developing new strategies based on this data by analyzing and using indicators. Patent analysis is very popular for deriving various trends. The other sources of collecting information on patent filing data are patent databases like CA, DELPHION, USPTO, PCT/WIPO, DWPI, etc. which cover patents as well as main source of information for patent literature, which helps in collecting the patent data for analyzing various trends. These databases provide access to search data and analyze or refine it as per the requirements 227

5 using access points. The patents in chemical sciences can be analyzed using the IPC access point, and using this access point information about patent assignee, year, language, major contributors can be isolated by applying indicators. New concepts developed for patent analysis are covered under the area called Patinformatics, which is a process of measuring patenting activities for managerial or research decisions. The application of Patinformatics is gaining momentum day by day and softwares are also being developed to evaluate and analyze enormous patent information. 8.4 Patinformatics: Patinformatics has developed as an emerging technique, which analyses a set of patent data to discover relationships and trends among them which would be difficult to analyze when working with single patent document. Thus semantic patent search technology has revolutionized in patent research. Trippe (2003) pointed out that the field of patinformatics is used to indicate trends and developments and it deals with science of analyzing patent information to be searched. Internet resources, patent databases, data analyzing software and other analytical tools have developed more opportunities in the area of patent search, analysis and other value added services. India has become an attractive destination for patent related services because of availability of technical human resource and cost effectiveness. This calls for appropriate human resource development and upgrading skills of existing information professionals. The analyzed patent data can be presented in visual representation using bar graphs, polygonal line graphs, pie charts, radar charts and in other charts/graphs formats, which are also called Patent Maps. The various tools useful for generation of patent maps are Vantage Point, Aureka ThemeScape, Crystal Xelcious, STN AnaVist, etc. There is an integration of latent semantic analysis / advanced linguistics patent search technology, portfolio management software, online patent analytics, international patent database and information used in a Decision Support System (DSS). 228

6 8.4.1 Patinformatics Applications: Patent information has different aspects other than technological or legal information. Some of the practical applications of patent information for decision making include: Managing and monitoring Research and Development (R&D), A Tool for creative thinking, Competitor monitoring, Technology assessment, New Venture Evaluation, Input for licensing strategy, Supporting to Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) Human Resource Management (HRM). In today's complex knowledge-driven economy, effective use of patent information for developing and introducing a new product may determine the success or failure of the product and, in turn, the success or failure of the company itself. Hence patent analytics are used to avoid many problems in R & D for making research decisions and policies. 8.5 Types of Analysis: Generally the following types of analysis are useful for researchers in building their concepts according to their needs. (Bailey Wood, (Accessed on 12 Feb 2010)) Innovation trends Technology trends Competitors analysis Assignee / Inventor trends or key players Geographical trends 229

7 Research trends Emerging technology trends The other factors considered while analyzing patents are citation tree (citing patents, backward and forward), finding the benchmark patents etc Key Analysis Techniques: There are six different indicators used to assess the inventiveness of an organization (Thomson Reuters. Volume of patents (for ranking according to volume of patent contribution) Impact of patents (later published inventions which cite earlier work i.e. citation count) Efficiency and effectiveness of research (worldwide trends in patent filings) Productivity of research (number of patents in force and practice) Domestic focus (number of national patents and ratio to total number of patents) International scope (considering number of different countries in which inventions have been filed) Patent analysis which is used to measure innovation is also used by academia, industries, and policy decision makers Benefits of Patent Analysis: Patent analysis is very useful to entities that are in the process of patent development or patent filing activity. The major benefits of analyzing patent literature are; Reduction in cost of production of the substance Minimized risk factor. Improved productivity of an organization Increase in revenue (due to licensing of products in the market) Valuation and performance measure of an organization 230

8 Breitzman (2002, 2007) has indicated that patent analysis is used for several aspects however it is not effective in all industries but few industries like telecommunication, information technology, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, chemicals, automotive etc are benefited by analysis. Chemical industries and chemical sciences are leading in patent filings and it is a good practice to analyze patent literature in this area to understand the developments in it. In this research study it was decided to use following indicators and data from various patent databases, information resources and statistical information published by few organizations like OECD, CAS, etc. has been analyzed. 1) Global patent growth (for analyzing top patent filing countries) 2) Contribution of top patent filing countries ( Counting patent filings and ranking them by comparison/contribution) 3) Country comparison and finding top 10 countries 4) Analyzing patent growth in chemical sciences (analysis of only chemical sciences contribution) 5) Country comparison and analyzing top 10 countries in filing patents in chemical sciences 6) Comparison of patent assignees and their contribution (analyzing assignee contribution and progress in the patent filing) 7) Analysis of area contribution by the assignee (analyzing trends in the discipline). Accordingly the emphasis was focused in activities of patents related to patent growth, country comparison, assignee contribution and comparison, university filing comparison, chemical science contribution, trends mapping etc which has been collected, analyzed and presented in this study. This study leads to some key findings and based on these findings, analytical trends are developed. Using patent indicators, few strategies and activities are considered for future development in chemical sciences. This analytical study is also useful for capacity building of innovators in bringing out new inventive concepts. 231

9 8.6 Patents: A Tool for S & T Indicators: Griliches (1990) has indicated that patent statistics help in solving problems related to technological developments in the area of research and supports indicative economic growth, rate of technological change, competitive firms, and countries. Patent statistics provide a measure of innovation output, as they reflect the inventive performance of countries, regions, technologies, firms etc. Patent literature serves as an indicator to measure the output of R & D, its productivity, structure and development of a specific technology or industry Patent indicators: Patent indicators are used to map aspects of innovative performance and technological progress of countries, regions, or certain specific domains and technology fields. The use of patent statistics for monitoring developments in the field of S & T has been expanding rapidly in recent years. Patent indicators are regularly published in various analytical reports or studies especially OECD Compendium of Patent Statistics and WIPO statistical Summary. Patent based indicators are now more frequently used because of the close relationship between patents and innovative output. However, there is no standard output method of calculating indicators from patent data but following indicators can be used to establish few facts. County wise patent filings Assignee indicators Technological or subject indicators Resident and non-resident patent filings indicators University / institute patent filing indicators Language wise International patent filings These can also be summarized in following groups 1) Geographical Distribution Indicator: These cover patent counts by priority filing, counts by inventor s country of residence and counts by applicant s country of residence etc. 232

10 2) Reference dates: These are related to countries by applications filed and countries by patents granted, family patents, etc during specific period. 3) Technological Area: This is also an important indicator to find trends in area of technology as well as to find emerging trends and obsolete technologies in R & D. 4) Patent filings at Patent offices and countries (provides an overview of patenting activity across the world). Among few available indicators of technological output, (OECD, 2007) patent counts can be made of different types, within each type, some selectivity may or may not be exercised. For instance, one can count all applications in one country, or only patents granted. A patent can be attributed to the applicant (the patentee at the date of application) or the inventor or the country where it has been filed first (priority). These indicators are more useful and they help in analyzing growth in patents, country patent filings, assignee comparison, inventor comparison, university patent comparison, technological area filing comparison which helps in determining new emerging areas Advantages of Patent indicators: There are many advantages for using indicators in S & T developments as pointed out by OECD (2007). Patent indicators help in deriving trends; however the major advantages are, They have a close link to inventors They cover broad range of technologies Rich source of scientific and technical information Patent data is readily available from patent offices for analysis However, few drawbacks are also reported in using patents indicators like, many patents have no industrial applications or substantial value, many inventions are not patented, the value of patent differs across countries and industries, and differences in patent 233

11 regulations and laws etc. But patent indicators are generally used for fixing trends. Patent indicators can also be used in combination with other science and technology indicators to prepare various policies, measure of innovative output, performances of the countries and assignees. Patent analysis and application of indicators brings out emerging technologies and overall growth of patents. The analysis of data based on regional contribution of patent filings brought to the notice that European Community, Japan and United States are the leading regions (called as Triadic Patent Families) and share about 28.4%, 28.8% and 31% respectively during the year 2005 (OCED 2007). Though the patenting activity is gaining global importance, patent activity is concentrated among few countries. US, Japan, Germany, Korea, France, Netherland and UK together accounted for 86% of total OECD Triadic Patent families during US contributes more in this area but since 1995, China and Korea are rapidly growing. In this study indicators were used to analyze patent literature from patent databases and statistical information resources. A detailed study is reported in the following paragraphs. Albert (1998 & 1999) is of the opinion that patent-based indicators are extremely useful for comparing and monitoring trends in technology output of different countries. However, one has to follow some methodological rules in constructing them if we are to avoid certain statistical biases. The proposals on patent families, priority years and country of invention outlined in this article are a step in that direction. 8.7 Patent Analysis CAS, USPTO, WIPO, Thomson Reuters, EPO, OECD, JPO etc. are the major patent data resources which are compilers and statistical information analyzers. Hence, these resources have been used to compile and analyze the data using different patent indicators. The data presented below is categorized as per the indicator applied for data analysis. 234

12 8.7.1 Patent Filing Developments: Growth Indicator This indicator is generally applied to find the contribution made by every country in filing patents and their annual growth tracking. This indicates development in the global patent filing. Based on the data conceptual finding could be tracked. For this purpose the annual growth of patents reported in various information sources have been analyzed. Few databases and patent offices have been reviewed for this purpose. The patent filing data at USPTO from 1977 to 2009 is analyzed and grouped in the following table. A) United States Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO) Table 8.1 USPTO Filings (1977 to 2009) Total Applications Patent Filing Years filed

13 Total Applications Patent Filing Years filed (Source: stat.pdf) Fig. 8.1 USPTO Filings (1977 to 2009) This data indicates constant growth in patent filings at USPTO. B) World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO): The data compiled for the period from 1985 to 2007 for patent application filings along with residential and non residential patent filings are reported in the following table. 236

14 Table 8.2 WIPO Patent Applications filing from 1985 to 2007 Total Patent Applications Total resident Patent Applications Non- Resident Applications Year , (Source: 237

15 Fig. 8.2 WIPO Patent Applications filing from 1985 to 2007 The data from above table indicates that the applications filed at international level are also increasing and the developments indicate upward growth in patent filing. It is also reported that the trends of non-resident patent applicant filings are also increasing than the residents. C) Triadic Patent Filing Developments: Among the various studies dealing with analysis of patent growth, the triadic patent filing data extracted from WIPO (WIPO ( has reported the development of patents in triadic patent countries. The number of triadic patent families and sets of patents taken at European Patent Office (EPO), Japan Patent Office (JPO) and US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), have increased (almost doubled) since the mid- 1980s. Triadic patent families grew at an average rate of 5.8% per year from 1995 and 2000, but the beginning of 21st century was marked by a slowdown, with an average growth rate of 3% per year till 2005 and has again showed a rising trend after

16 D) OECD and Asian region Patent Filings: OECD estimated that the number of patents filed in 2005 were about 52,000. Similar trends were observed from the mid-1990s at the country level, the European Union, Japan and the United States altogether account for 88% of triadic patent families, with respective shares of 28%, 29% and 31%. However, OECD countries show contrasting trends whereas most countries have followed a relatively steady growth rate since Spectacular growth has occurred in Asian countries. Germany still ranks third and Europe s strongest inventive performer as measured by patent families. Korea reached fourth position in 2005, just ahead of France and the United Kingdom, having gained eight relative positions compared to its 1995 ranking. This upsurge is also observed in China and India, with respective average growth of 33% and 26% per year from 1995 and China entered the top 15 patenting countries in However, the trends indicated an upward growth 2005 onwards. E) Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) / Chemical Abstracts(CA): The CAS data published in terms of patent filing also reported upward trends and in comparison with the journal articles and patents filings, it is reported that the patent abstracts covered in the CA file has indicated patent growth since The growth of patents reported in year 2006 as compared to 1977 was around 51.27%. This is the indication of overall growth at a global level in the technological area of chemical sciences Comparison among Counties: Geographical Indicator The comparison among countries using patent filing count is prominent way to identify top patent filing countries globally. This is useful for monitoring research oriented countries in the world and possible technology users. The data extracted using different resources are detailed below. 239

17 A) WIPO / PCT Data: WIPO is a major organization in development monitoring organizations. The trends in patent filings analyzed for the period 2003 to 2006 is reported below. Table 8.3 PCT International Applications filed among top countries 2006 Country / Year Percentage Percentage growth United States Japan Germany France Korea United Kingdom Netherlands China Switzerland Canada Australia Eeuropean Patent Office All Others (Source: WIPO Statistics 2007: PCT Statistical Indicators Report December 2007) 240

18 Fig. 8.3 PCT International Applications filed among top countries (2003 to 2006) Fig. 8.4 PCT International Applications filed among top countries (2006 Percentage and Percentage growth) The data indicates that trends in patent filings are increasing and all the leading countries have indicated upward trends in patent filings. Though the growth in filing is noticed, it is uneven as compared to previous year in 2004 where the growth was 6.4%, 241

19 in 2005 it was 11.5%, in 2006, 9.4% and in 2007 it was estimated to 4.4%. (WIPO, 2007). Developing countries are filing patents on a large scale over the years. Therefore, an effort was made to study the patent filings in developing countries like Korea, China, India, Singapore, etc. The following table reviews the growth in patent filing reported by PCT/WIPO in developing countries from 2003 to Table 8.4 PCT International Applications among Developing Countries (2003 to 2006) Country / Year Percentage 2006 Percentage growth Korea China India Singapore South Africa Brazil Mexico (Source: WIPO Statistics 2007: PCT Statistical Indicators Report December 2007) Fig. 8.5 PCT International Applications among Developing Countries (2003 to 2006) 242

20 Fig. 8.6 PCT International Applications among Developing Countries (2006 Percentage and Percentage Growth) From the data it is apparent that the trend in developing countries for filing of international patents is also rising and although Korea and China are covered in the developing countries, their share is much higher than the developed countries. India holds third position among the developing countries and in future can progress and can be listed among the top patent filing countries of the world because the growth from 2005 in Indian patent filing is excellent. The PCT data extracted from the WIPO database is tabulated below. The data indicates top 15 countries as per the reported patent filings and data is covered from 2004 to 2007 and the estimated data for the year 2008 is considered. This is generalized patent filing data among top 15 countries. 243

21 Table 8.5 PCT International Applications top 15 countries Country estimate percent growth USA Japan Germany Republic of Korea France China United Kingdom Netherlands Sweden Switzerland Canada Italy Finland Australia Israel All Others Total (Source: WIPO patent database.) 244

22 Fig. 8.7 PCT International Applications top 15 countries (2004 to 2008) Fig. 8.8 PCT International Applications top 15 countries (2008 Percentage growth) 245

23 The analysis indicates growth of patents in various countries. USA, Japan, Germany, Korea, France, China are leading nations in filing patents. The information posted on the site trade.suit101.com provided the analysis of the 15 prominent countries during 2004 and 2005 based on national and international filings at PCT. Table 8.6 Top 15 countries patent filing at PCT in 2004 Serial no. Country Application filling 1 Japan South Korea USA Germany Australia New Zealand Finland Denmark Norway UK Sweden Austria France Israel Switzerland 217 (Source: trade.suit101) 246

24 Table 8.7 Top 15 countries contribution in patent filing in 2005 Serial No. Country No of patent filling 1 USA 46,115 2 Japan 28,829 3 Germany 16,002 4 France 5,736 5 UK 5,103 6 South Korea 4,686 7 Netherlands 4,530 8 Switzerland 3,264 9 Sweden 2, China 2, Italy 2, Canada 2, Australia 1, Finland 1, Israel 1,456 (Source: trade.suit101) This analysis indicates that the top patent filing countries at global level are US, JP, KR, CN, DE, FR,GB, NL, CA etc. Thomson Reuters (2007) reviewed patent activity in 2007 and analyzed the trends from world s G 8 Countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, UK, USA, China and South Korea). The analysis indicates that the patent activity has increased over the last 5 years. It has increased by 21%, between 2003 and Japan, China and US are the top patent filing countries among the G 8 countries. The academic innovations have highest ratio in China, Japan and US (25% of total patenting activity) B) USPTO: Using patent analysis and trends developed by USPTO patent filing granted to the different patent offices by USPTO, the data has been extracted and analyzed for the period from 1963 to 1994 and from 1995 to The data is reported in the following table. 247

25 Table 8.8 USPTO Patents: Year wise patent distributed. (1963 to 2008) 248

26 Fig. 8.9 USPTO Patents: Year wise patent distributed. (1963 to 2008) This data analysis clearly point out the growth in patent literature and is treated as a valuable source of information. From the data it is also reported that major patent filing countries as per the USPTO data which rank at leading positions are : US, Japan, Germany, UK, France, Canada, Korea, Italy, Netherlands, Australia, USSR, China, India etc and there is an upward trend in patent filing in these countries. The data has also been useful in selecting the top patent filing countries for this research study Technology Monitoring: Technology Trend Indicator This is an essential analysis for finding trends in particular subject area or technology. The leading subject area and new emerging areas could be predicted due to this 249

27 analysis. The data collected from various resources are presented below. As a specific subject in study, the field of chemical sciences has been selected for technology monitoring purposes. The patent statistical data resources like Thomson Reuters, USPTO, CAS, WIPO, etc. and chemical patent filings from the patent databases like CA, Delphion, INPADOC, USPTO etc are studied properly and the collected data is listed in tabular form. This data is used for the analysis of patenting trends and predicting the activity in chemical sciences. A) Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) / Chemical Abstracts (CA): The best source of finding global patent filing information in chemical science is Chemical Abstracts. The patent data compilation is published in CAS data summary published by ACS/CAS every year. The data is based on abstracts included in the CA database and grouped into periodical articles, patent literature and books. The development per year is recorded to find the trends in chemical sciences. The data is grouped into five year compilation for proper analysis. The trends are set up by analyzing the data in chemical sciences. The statistical compilation of the abstracts covered in Chemical Abstracts for major resources like periodical articles, patents and books along with their percentage contributions is detailed in the following table. This data is compiled from technical summary published by CAS, USA in This data covers from its inception of service i.e. for the period from 1907 to The detailed comparative chart is given in Appendix

28 Table 8.9 Patent filings in Chemical Sciences Period Total abstracts Papers/Articles % Patents % Books % (v1-5) 81,702 59, , , (6-10) 1,10,028 73, , , (11-15) 84,843 59, , , (16-20) 1,33,391 1,02, , , (21-25) 2,28,793 1,47, , , (26-30) 3,15,169 1,96, ,10, , (31-35) 3,06,545 2,12, , , (36-40) 2,06,265 1,44, , , (41-45) 2,58,856 2,05, , , (46-50) 4,04,571 3,37, , , (51-55) 6,29,799 5,01, ,19, , (56-65) 9,48,134 7,90, ,43, , (66-75) 13,13, , ,94, , (76-85) 17,72,194 14,57, ,93, , (86-95) 22,01,692 18,63, ,04, , (96-105) 23,02,471 18,97, ,78, , ( ) 24,82,482 20,21, ,40, , ( ) 31,30,955 25,63, ,48, , ( ) 35,99,227 29,15, ,60, , ( ) 44,80,761 34,64, ,98, , ( ) 10,86,941 8,16, ,65, , (Source: CAS Technical Summary 2007) The analysis of the data presented in the table indicates that, there is a growing trend of patent filings in chemical sciences. The periodical articles are contributing heavily and it is followed by patent literature. However the other publications usage especially 251

29 books are decreasing year by year as compared to periodical articles and patent literature. It is clear that trends in the patent filing are growing and also gaining importance since 1977 and since 2007 the growth is increasing by 25% approximately. The growth of patents reported in the year 2006 as compared to 1997 was around 51.27%. B) International Patent Documentation Center ( INPADOC): INPADOC (EPIDOS) is a patent database developed by INPADOC and now managed by the European Patent Office and known as EPIDOS. This patent database is very useful and covers the global patent information in all the subject disciplines. However using the IPC code viz. C= Chemical Sciences and C07 = Organic Chemistry, subjective patent data can be isolated from this database. Using these criteria the database has been searched and the data is presented in the following table for the period from 2005 to

30 Table 8.10 Chemical Patents filing (1964 to 2007) Country / Year All ( Complete Knowledge) All ( Chemistry) All Organic Chemistry( US,EP, WO,JP,DE,INPADOC) INPADOC US European Japanese WIPO German ARIPO (AP) EAPO (EA) OAPI AT AU BE CA CH CN CS/CZ DK ES FI FR GB HU IN IT KR NL NZ PL RO RU / SU ZA (Source: INPADOC Patent database search (IPC) 253

31 Fig Chemical Patents filing (1964 to 2007) 254

32 The analysis of data from the above table points out the constant level of growth in chemical patents during the period from 1964 to The country wise development in relation with patent filings 1997 to 2007, were ranked and the ranking of countries are Japan (JP), 1,63,735; World patent applications (WIPO/PCT) 1,59,710 ; USA (US) 1,14,027; Australia (AU) 98,818; China (CN), 98,653;Germany (DE) 78,512; Canada (CA) 71,754; European countries (EP) 44,487; Spain (ES) 29,033; Korea (KR) 28,078 ; Hungary (HU) 27,873; Russia (RU) 16,554; France (FR) 10458; New Zealand (NZ) 11,671; United Kingdom (GB) 9680 etc. These are the prominent countries contributing to chemical sciences. Since the ranking of countries is based on patents filings, the ranking of countries varies every year. However these courtiers are maintaining constant growth. Hence, based on this data the top ten patent filing countries have been isolated and selected for research study. The data has been searched form the INPADOC (using Delphion) database, this is a general commercial database and hence all the chemical patents might not be covered in this patent database. However the trend reported in this table varies as per the coverage of the database. C) USPTO: Statistical data which is related to patent filings in chemical sciences has been extracted from USPTO ( ). The country wise filings of the chemical patents among various countries are detailed in the following table. 255

33 Table 8.11 Patents granted by USPTO for prominent countries from 1977 to 2006 (Source: USPTO patent statistics stat.pdf) From the data it is understood that in area of chemical sciences, USA (US) 34061; Japan (JP) 6302; Germany (DE) 2462; Korea (KR) 1185, France (FR) 950; Great Britain UK (GB) 889; Canada (CA) 715; India (IN) 231 are the leading countries as per the USPTO database. Although the countries contribution is different, ranking of countries is almost same in all the databases considered in this study. 256

34 D) WIPO Total numbers of patent applications in chemical sciences (covering all broad subject areas) reported by WIPO (2008 & 2009) for the period from 2001 to 2006 are analyzed below using the WIPO Statistical review Table 8.12 Patent filings by field of technology, Chemical Sciences % Organic fine - chemistry 64,170 64,026 59,622 59,835 63,317 63, % Biotechnology 45,573 47,576 44,632 41,993 40,861 43, % Pharmaceuticals 69,355 69,160 66,050 68,650 74,254 83, % Macromolecular chemistry, - polymers 41,842 38,615 36,656 36,108 38,137 37, % Food chemistry 21,296 23,535 24,850 23,110 24,653 25, % Basic materials - chemistry 51,058 48,418 46,106 45,508 48,040 49, % Materials, metallurgy 39,882 37,451 36,813 35,579 37,705 38, % Surface technology, coating 41,086 39,478 39,894 41,208 42,437 41, % Micro-structural and nanotechnology 3,425 2,770 2,994 2,967 3,357 3, % Chemical - engineering 51,319 48,148 46,306 44,906 44,845 44, % Environmental technology 29,889 28,718 28,636 28,365 28,650 27, % (Source: WIPO (2009) df)) 257

35 Fig Patent filings by field of technology, From the comparison of data it is observed that among the chemical sciences, trends are clearly set and growth in discipline. The emerging trends are reported in the field of nano technology, environmental technology, pharmaceuticals and drugs in which the growth is prominent. However every year the trends are shifting and the contribution of the patents is also varying. The compilation of data from PCT applications from 2003 to 2006 is narrated in the following table. The table represents the development of PCT International Applications filed as per the IPC code which represents technology trends in S & T. 258

36 Table 8.13 IPC Code Application filing at PCT during 2003 to 2006 (Technical Field Filing) IPC Code Application filings filings (Predicted) 2007 Percent age 2006 Percentage A61K G06F H04L H01L G01N C07D A61B C12N H04N C07K (Source: WIPO Statistics 2007: PCT Statistical Indicators Report December 2007) IPC Codes used in table 8.13: A61K Preparations for the medical, Dental or Toilet Purpose G06F Electric Digital Data Processing H04L Transmission of Digital Information H01L Semiconductor Devices, Electric, Solid state devices G01N Analysis Materials by determining chemical or physical properties C07D Heterocyclic compounds A61B Diagnosis, Surgery, Identification C12N Microorganizms or Enzymes H04N Pictorial Communication e.g. Television C07K Peptides 259

37 Fig IPC Code Application filing at PCT during 2003 to 2006 (Technical Field Filing) The analysis of WIPO data as per the PCT filings indicates top ten technical fields as per the application filings during the period from 2003 to The above table illustrates the top technical subject fields. In this organic chemistry, peptides, microorganisms and enzymes are in leading positions along with other technological areas. This indicates that chemical sciences are prominent in R & D. The analysis of language wise distribution of applications filed at PCT is detailed in the following table. 260

38 Table 8.14 Language wise coverage of PCT applications 2003 to 2006 Language wise Application filings filings (Predicted) 2006 Percentage English Japanese German French Korean Chinese Spanish Italian Russian Dutch Swedish Finnish Norwegian Danish (Source: WIPO Statistics 2007: PCT Statistical Indicators Report December 2007) 2007 Percentage Fig Language wise coverage of PCT applications 2003 to

39 From the above statistics, though the English Language is contributing 60%, other languages also need to be considered. The trend indicates that the Japanese, German, French, Korean and Chinese are more used. The remaining languages Hungarian, Czech, Portuguese are also contributing to PCT Ranking of Patent Filing Countries and Identifying Major Players: There are many information resources available, which provide the listing of Top patent filing countries based on statistical information. Short (2005), in the business issue of Chemical Engineering News, recorded the top 50 Global Chemical Industries in the year This data is based on chemical production, business and marketing strategies. The listing of the 50 global chemical industries ranked is given below. 1) Dow Chemical US 2) BASF Germany 3 ) Du Pont US 4 ) Royal Dutch 5) Shell U.K. 6) Exxon Mobile US 7) Total France 8 ) Bayer Germany 9) China Petroleum & Chemical, China 10) Mitsubishi Chemical Japan 11) SABIC Saudi Arabia 12) Degussa Germany 13) Formosa Plastics Group Taiwan 14) Akzo Nobel Netherlands 15) Huntsman Corp. U.S. 16) Mitsui Chemicals Japan 17) Air Liquide France18) ICI U.K. 19) Sumitomo Chemical Japan 20) Toray Industries Japan 21) DSM Netherlands 22) Equistar Chemicals 23) Dainippon Ink & Chemicals Japan 24) Chevron Phillips US 25) Shin Etsu Japan 26) General Electric US 27) Lanxessh Germany 28) PPG Industries U.S. 29) Asahi Kasei, Japan 30) BOC England 31) Air Products U.S 32) Ineos Groupi U.K 33) Clariant Switzerland 34) ENI Italy 35) Praxair U.S.36) Eastman Chemical U.S. 37) Reliance Industries India 38) Rhodia, France 39) Sasol, South Africa 40) Solvay Belgium 41) Rohm and Haas U.S. 42)Yara Norway 43) LG Chemk South Korea 44) Syngenta Switzerland 45) Lyondell Chemical U.S. 46) Borealis Denmark 47) Ciba Specialty Chemical Switzerland 48) Teijin Japan 49) Nova Chemicals Canada 50) Celanese US It is found that US, Germany, UK, France, China, Japan, Netherlands are the leading countries and major players are also reported above. These may change every year as it 262

40 depends upon the patent filing data which is fluctuating year by year. Hence trend during a particular year is considered for finding the top countries and assignees. The major patent filing countries and assignees as per the PCT WIPO data are listed below. This is extracted from the WIPO statistical analysis during the year Table 8.15 PCT Applicants in Ranking Applicant's Name Country of Origin PCT applications published in 2008 Increased over HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD. CN PANASONIC CORPORATION JP KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V. NL TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA JP ROBERT BOSCH GMBH DE SIEMENS AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT DE NOKIA CORPORATION FI LG ELECTRONICS INC. KR TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL) SE FUJITSU LIMITED JP QUALCOMM INCORPORATED US NEC CORPORATION JP SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA JP MICROSOFT CORPORATION US MOTOROLA, INC. US BASF SE DE INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION US M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY US SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. KR

41 2008 Ranking Applicant's Name Country of Origin PCT applications published in 2008 Increased over E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY US MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION JP PIONEER CORPORATION JP HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, L.P. US CONTINENTAL AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT DE THOMSON LICENSING FR ELECTRONICS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH INSTITUTE KR THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY US NXP B.V. NL SONY ERICSSON MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB SE BSH BOSCH UND SIEMENS HAUSGERÄTE GMBH DE INTEL CORPORATION US INA-SCHAEFFLER KG DE DAIKIN INDUSTRIES, LTD. JP THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA US HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC. US RENAULT S.A.S. FR KYOCERA CORPORATION JP ZTE CORPORATION CN GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY US TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED US SONY CORPORATION JP EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY US BAKER HUGHES INCORPORATED US

42 2008 Ranking Applicant's Name Country of Origin PCT applications published in 2008 Increased over NOVARTIS AG CH APPLE COMPUTER, INC. US FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FÖRDERUNG DER ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG E.V. DE DOW GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. US NIKON CORPORATION JP THE BOEING COMPANY US CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA JP (Source: PCT/WIPO Database) The countries contributing patents through PCT/ WIPO are almost same but the players taking part are changed. This indicates the developments in the patent filing countries and patent assignees. The data from PCT has less coverage of chemical subject. But in other areas the same countries are taking part in the patent filings like CN, JP, US, NL, DE, KR and FR. IFI prepared a list of top 35 major patent assignees based on patent application filings during the year

43 Table 8.16 Top 35 major patent assignees based on the patent application filings during the year (Source: Rank 1 Company Name 2008 Patents INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO LTD KR CANON K K JP MICROSOFT CORP INTEL CORP 1776 MATSUSHITA ELECTRIC INDUSTRIAL CO 6 LTD JP TOSHIBA CORP JP FUJITSU LTD JP SONY CORP JP 1485 HEWLETT-PACKARD DEVELOPMENT CO 10 L P HITACHI LTD JP MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC SEIKO EPSON CORP JP GENERAL ELECTRIC CO FUJIFILM CORP JP RICOH CO LTD JP INFINEON TECHNOLOGIES AG DE LG ELECTRONICS INC KR TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC HONDA MOTOR CO LTD JP SIEMENS AG DE 724 HON HAI PRECISION INDUSTRY CO LTD 22 TW DENSO CORP JP CISCO TECHNOLOGY INC BROADCOM CORP HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC NOKIA AB OY FI 608 SILVERBROOK RESEARCH PTY LTD AU SHARP K K JP NEC CORP JP BROADCOM CORPXEROX CORP LG PHILIPS LCD CO LTD KR RENESAS TECHNOLOGY CORP JP SUN MICROSYSTEMS INC 509 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N V 35 NL

44 ICIS ( listed top global chemical companies, viz. BASF, Sow, Exxonmobil, Shell, Lyondellbassel, Sabic, Sinopec, Mitsubishi Chemicals and Dupont. The Wikipedia ( ww.en.wilipediaorg/wiki/) also listed major patent filing companies which include Akzonobel, Sumitomo Chemicals, Mitsubishi Chemicals, Bayer, Asahi Kasei, etc. From the above data the countries have been compiled based on patent filing data and ten countries have been selected for analysis purpose in the present research study. These include Japan, USA, Germany, UK, France, Korea, Canada, India, Netherlands, China, Australia, and Russia. Among these prominent selected patent filing countries in chemical sciences, the major companies i.e. patent assignees were compiled based on the patent filing counts and are listed below. A) Major Chemical Industries (Patent Assignees). USA: Dow chemical, Exxon Mobil, DuPont, Lyondell Chemical, Rohm and Hass, Eastman Chemicals, GE PPG Industries, Lubrizol, Portia LLC, Germany: BASF, Bayer, Degussa, Henkel KGAA, Wacker Chemie, Altana AG, Gruenthal GMBH. UK: Shell, BP Chemicals, Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), BOC, Johnson Matthey, PLC France: Total, Rhodia Chemie, L oreal SA, Arkema France, Ciphalon, Nicox SA China: China Petroleum and Chemical, Nanjing Zongshi Chemicals Co., Tianjin Dek Chemical Co Ltd, Avexa Ltd. Japan: Mitsubishi Chemical Corp, Mitsui Chemicals, Sumitomo Chemical Co. Ltd, Dainippon Ink and Chemicals, Shin Etsu Chemical, Asahi Kasei Chemicals, Teijin, Toray industries, Nissan Chemical Industries ltd., Nippon Chemical industry, UBE Industries, Showa Denko, Kao Corporation, Japan Synthetic rubber, Idemitsu Kosan, 267

45 Daiichi Sankyo, Toyama Chemical Company, Ihara Chemical company, Fujitsu Limited Netherland: Akzo Nobel, DSM, Furanix Technologies, Crucell Holland B V, Plus Chemicals B V, Synthon BVAlbemarle Netherlands, Unilever, Keygene N V India: Relience Industries, BIOCON Ltd. Hindustan Unilever, Advinus, Reddy s laboratories, Vinati Organics,, Hylan India Pvt. ltd, Atul Ltd., BASF India, Gharda Chemicals, Jubilant Organosys, Tata Chemicals, United Phosphorus, Pidilite, Aditya Birla Chemicals, Alkyl Amines, Arvinda Chemicals, Ciba India Ltd, Deepak Nitrite, Godrej, Hikal Ltd, HOCL, L G Polymers, Jay Chemicals, Clariant Chemicals Switzerland: Clariant(BASF), Syngenta, Ciba Specialities, Lonza Group ltd,, Canada: Nova Chemical, Merck Frosst Canada, Canada Chemical Corporation, Methylgene, Angiochem Inc. Neuraxon Inc. Korea South: LG Chem, National Plastic, Ace Chemical, Hanwha Chemical, KCC Chemical, Namhae Chemical Corporation, Seohan Chemical, Soogang Chemical, Tas Chemicals, Amorepacific Corp, Cheil Industries Inc., Hyosung Corporation, Anigen Co ltd, SK Chemicals, Panagene Inc Austarlia: Alchemia Ltd, Avexa ltd, Hexima Ltd, CSL Ltd, Vegenics Ltd. B) Pharmaceutical Companies USA: Pfizer (Wyeth), Johnson and Johnson, Abbott, Merck & co, Bristol Meyers, Eli Lilly and Co, Amgen, Genentech, Baxter, P and G, Allergan, Biogen Idec, Mylan, 3M Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Cephalon, Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Barr Pharmaceuticals, Bausch and Lomb, Celgene Corp., Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Exxon Mobil, King Pharmaceuticals, Watson Pharma, Forest Laboratories, Germany: Boehringer, Merck KGaA, Bayer, Schwarz Pharma AG, UK: Glaxo Smith Kline, AstraZeneca, Genix Pharma, 268

46 France: Sanofi Aventis, Beaufour Ispen International, Aventis Pharma SA China: SINOPHARM, Japan: Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Chugai Pharma, Taiho Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Eisai, Mitsubishi Pharma, Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma, Shionogi, Kissei Pharmaceutical Co ltd, Netherlands: Akzo nobel, Switzerland: Hoffman La Roche, Novartis, Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd, India: Ajanta Pharma, Cenataur Pharmaceuticals, Cipla, Reddy s lab, Lupin, Macleods Pharmaceuticals, Meyer Organics, Orchid Pharma, Ranbaxy, Torrent Pharma, Wings Pharma, Zydus Cadila Healthcare, Watson Pharma ltd, Aurobindo Pharma Ltd, Dabur Pharma Ltd, Hetero drugs, Cipla limited, Ranbaxy, Orchid Research Lab, BICON Ltd, Cadila Health care, Lupin Ltd, Glenmark, Alembic, US Vitamins, Unichem Laboratories, Wockhardt Research Center, Ajanta Chemicals C) Indian Chemical Companies: Ranbaxy, Dr Reddy s lab, Cipla, Sun Pharma industries, Lupin Labs, Aurobindo Pharma, Cadila Healthcare, IPCA Laboratories, Aventis Pharma, Glaxo Smith Kline Pharma. D) Universities: USA: University of California, University of Texas, Massachusetts Institute of technology, Stanford University, University of Michigan, Yale university, Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, North Carolina University State, Duke University, John Hopkins University, Harvard University, Ohio State University, University of Colorado Germany: Universitat Wurzburg, Phillips Universitat, Universitat Heidelberg, Universitat Berlin, Universitat Zukoln 269

47 UK: Kings College London, Queen s University of Belfast, Univ of Shefield, The notingham Univ, Univ Edinberg, Univ of Manchester, Univ of York, Univ Durham, Univ of Kent France: Center National de la Recherche Scientifique, Univ de la Mediterranee, Univ Rennes, Uninivsite Joseph Paurier, Univ de la Rouen, Univ Louis Pasteur, Unniv de Nantes, Institut Curie, Univ Paris China: Shanghai Jiatong Univ, Institute of pharmacology and toxicology, East China Univ of Sci and Tech, Peking Univ Japan: University of Tokyo, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Kyoto University, Keio University, Nagoya University, Osaka University, Chiba University, Hokkaido university, Nihon University, Kogoshima University Universitst Munster, Netherlands: Univ Van Amsterdam, Fudan Univ, Leiden Univ, Wageningen Univ India: University of Delhi, IIT s, Nirma University, University of Punjab, Mumbai University, University of Pune (few more covered in table 8.18). Along with universities, IISc Bangalore, IITs, and CSIR (leading organizations in educational sector) are also considered. Korea: Korea Research Inst of Chemical Technology, Seoul National University Industry foundation, Ewha Univ, Sogang Univ, Korea Univ Industry Canada: National Research Council Canada, University of Alberta, Mcgill Univ, Queen s University at Kingston, Univ of Manitoba, Univ of Western Ontario Australia: Univ of Sydney, Univ of Queen s, Monash Univ, Australian National Univ, Univ Melbourne, Univ of Wollongong Comparison of major assignees (companies). USPTO has analyzed the global top assignees in the area of chemical sciences giving the details of applications filed and patents granted which reflect the development of 270

48 companies from major countries selected for research study. The detailed table has been given in Appendix 4. The contribution of various companies has been analyzed using the CA database and the statistical data has been compiled to track the major innovative assignees of each country. The contribution in terms of patented and non-patented literature is also assessed in the study. Chemical Abstracts is used as a source through which data is evaluated for the period from 1997 to The data is presented in the table attached as Appendix 5. Since it is difficult to cover all the industries, randomly selected companies are evaluated to analyze the progress during the years 2008 and 2009 and have been reported in the following table. Table 8.17 Progress of Selected Companies in 2008 and 2009 Assignee Country Ciba CH Hoffman la Roche CH Novartis CH Synjenta CH China Petroleum CN BASF DE Bayer DE Henkel KGaA DE Waker DE Boehringer DE L oreal FR Aurobindo IN Cipla IN CSIR IN Dr Reddy's IN Ranbaxi IN

49 Assignee Country Torrent IN Asahi kasei JP Dai Nippon (DIC) JP Idemitsu Kosan JP Kao JP Mitsubishi Chemicals JP Nissan JP Showa Denko JP Sumitomo Chemicals JP Teijin JP Toray JP Cheil Industries KR Hyosung KR L G Chem KR Akzo Nobel NL DSM NL Unilever NL Shell UK Astra Zeneca UK Glaxo UK Dow Chemicals US 5 3 Dupont US Eastman Chemicals US Exxon Mobil US GE US Rohm and Hass US Abbot US Allergan US

50 Assignee Country Bristol Myers US Merck US Pfizer US P & G US Wyeth US (Source : CA Database) Fig Progress of Selected Companies in 2008 and The analysis of major assignees from top patent filing countries which contribute maximum in patent filings is given above. These assignees are analyzed further for contribution in particular area of chemical sciences. It is not possible to analyze the area of contribution for each assignee independently and hence, few assignees are randomly selected based on the progress of patent filings during the period from 1997 to 2007 and 2008 to

51 It is noticed that among selected countries and companies, Hoffman la Roche, Novartis, China petroleum, BASF, Bayer, Henkel, L Oreal, Cipla, Dr Reddy s, Torrent, Dai Nippon, Kao, Sumitomo Chemicals, Cheil Industries, Akzo Noble, Shell, DuPont, GE, Abbott, P and G are at leading positions. Their contribution in the field of chemical sciences is noticeable. BASF (DE) has filed patents in the area of Coating materials (158), Polymers and plastics, Polyurethanes (114), Polyesters (80), and Fungicides (69),filed for preparation, uses etc. Similarly Bayer (DE), DuPont (US), Asahi Kasei (JP), Hyosung (KR), have similar areas of development and they are the competitors in the same areas. China Petroleum (CN), Shell (GB) contribute in the area Petroleum refining, Fuels, Lubricant oils, Catalyst etc. whereas Henkel (DE), Kao (JP), have the common areas like surfactants, dyes, polyesters, polyurethanes, perfumes and cosmetics etc. Astra Zeneca (GB), Boehringer (DE) are filing patents in pharmaceuticals and drugs, drug delivery agents, pharmaceutical granules, analgesic etc. In Indian context, Ranbaxy, Lupin, Cipla, Tata Chemicals, Dr. Reddy s, Torrent, etc are progressive in patent filing and the area covered by them is related to drug delivery systems, pharmaceutical products, drugs, pharmaceutical granules, etc. which are useful as cure for various diseases Comparison of Major Global Universities including Indian Universities. A comparison of the contribution of various global universities including Indian universities with respect to patent filing has been analyzed using CA database and statistical data has been compiled to track progressive universities of each country. Chemical Abstracts is the main source through which the development in chemical sciences is covered. University Filings Comparison Indian V/S Global: It was also felt necessary to review the developments of patent filing activity in university sector. Hence a review of patent filing was conducted using the chemical 274

52 abstract as a tool, which is the more comprehensive and preferred database in the area of chemical sciences. The detailed data collected is presented in following tables. Indian and Foreign University Patent Filing Comparison (2005 to 2010 July): The detailed data collected from Chemical Abstracts database using SciFinder is presented in the following tables. Table 8.18 Indian University Patent filings from 2005 to 2010 University Mumbai + Bombay University Pune+ poona University Total Publica tions Pate nts Up to Country Shivaji University Delhi University Jadavpur University (2002) IN=7 US=2 IN=5 US=1 WO=3 1 (1990) IN= (1955) Madras University G B Pant University Hamdarad University IN=36 WO=18 US=4 GB=1 EP=1 IN=17 GB=1 FR=1 IN=9 WO=1 2 (2001) IN=19 1 (2003) IN=11 Amity University Banaras Hindu University North Maharashtra University (1978) IN=18 GB=1 IN=10 US=1 WO=1 1 (2004) IN=9 Punjabi University IN=7 275

53 University Total Publica tions Pate nts Calcutta University Up to Country 24 ( 1940) 2 4 Annamali University IN=8 WO=1 GB=1 IN=5 WO=1 Bharati Vidhyapeeth University IN=4 Jawaharlal Nehru University Saurashtra University (2004) IN=3 WO=2 US=1 2 (2004) 1 1 IN=4 Cochin University IN=5 Goa University IN=4 Osmania University ( ) IN=3 Panjab University Punjab University Hyderabad University (1996) (1998) Anna University IN=2 WO=2 IN=9 WO=1 US=2 IN=4 US=1 WO=3 FR=1 IN=4 WO=3 Bhavnagar University IN=2 Orissa University IN=2 Allahabad University Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada + Marathwada University 1 (2002) 1 1 IN=2 WO= IN=2 Kakatiya University WO=2 276

54 University Total Publica tions Pate nts Up to Country Karnataka University IN=2 Kerala University Mysore University Rajasthan University (1974) (2004) 2 IN=3 WO=1 IN=1 WO=2 1 (1978) IN=1 Indian Institute of Technology IN=389 JP=1 IL=1 US=9 WO=22 I I Sc CSIR (Source : Chemical Abstarcts Database using scifinder) IN= US=11 WO=29 EP=1 Fr=1 NL=1 GB=1 DE=1 Table 8.19 Global University patent filing data 2005 to 2010 Total Publicat ions Pate nts July University Country California University US Tokyo University JP Texax University US Masachusets University US Yale University US North Carolina University US Harvard Univ US

55 Total Publicat ions Pate nts July University Country Ohio State University US Wurzburg University DE Heidelberg University DE Manchester University GB York University GB Kent University GB Durham University GB Belfast University GB Paris University FR Louis Pastuer University FR Reness University FR Shanghai University CN East China University CN Peking University CN Magill University CA Koto University JP Keio University JP Nagoya University JP Osaka University JP Chiba University JP HokkaidoUni JP

56 Total Publicat ions Pate nts July University Country Nihon University JP Berlin Univ DE Amsterdam University NL Fudan University NL Wageningen University NL Ewha University KR Korea Uiversity KR Alberta University CA Manitoba University CA Ontario University CA Sydney University AU Monash University AU Melbourne University AU ( Source : Chemical Abstarcts Database Using Scifinder) 279

57 Fig Global University patent filing data 2005 to 2010 Random selection of universities both at Indian Universities and global universities has been made to compare the patent filing pattern among these universities. The observation of data presented in the above tables reveals that Indian universities are lagging behind in filing and obtaining the patents both at national and international 280