4 ms·
According to last year's stats, the tradeoff between Delaware and EDTX is that the patentee has a slightly lower chance of winning in Delaware (40%) than EDTX (
by josaka 9y ago
According to last year's stats, the tradeoff between Delaware and EDTX is that the patentee has a slightly lower chance of winning in Delaware (40%) than EDTX (54%), but when they do win, they get almost twice as much in damages ($17m vs. $9.4m). See https://www.pwc.com/us/en/forensic-services/publications/assets/2016-pwc-patent-litigation-study.pdf https://www.pwc.com/us/en/forensic-services/publications/ass...
- vmarsy 9y agoThat's an interesting report. The table only has 15 districts, but it looks like the best area against NPEs is Northern Illinois, and Northern California, with only a 13% success rate (vs. 48% success rate in EDTX) Texas Southern only has the lowest success rate for NPE (9%), but the median damages is $58m, compared to only $5m and $6m for the California and Illinois. It would be interesting to see the data for All district courts in the US. In those 15, California Northern looks the best in term of outcomes if you're likely to be at the mercy of NPEs, but I wonder how it compares to lets say Oregon, Western Texas, or Western Washington.
- blazespin 9y agoLikely there is a lot of bias in those stats that aren't skewed by the courts themselves but rather the cases brought to bare.
- adrianratnapala 9y agoSadly, take-away message from this underdetermined by the numbers you give. If the cases that come to all of these courts are roughly the same, then these data mean EDTX is only a little more patent friendly. But if it is true that EDTX is swamped by troll-plaintiffs with weak cases, then the fact that 54% of them steal win, is very damning.