« Darn It All |
Main
| Ardea's Gout Drug Progresses »
March 31, 2010
Only Three Patents? Really?
Posted by Derek
Here's an interesting list (PDF) of patent activity for life-science firms in the New England area. What I can't quite work out is how the numbers were generated. For example, it's very strange that Pfizer shows up with 3 patents from last year. A quick look through the databases shows more issued patents than that, although many of the ones I'm seeing are probably continuations-in-part of older parents.
But at any rate, if there's any consistent method of evaluating patents that shows Pfizer with fewer patents over the last few years than the likes of Neurogen and Nitromed - and that's what this one shows - then something's quite odd. I've emailed the people at MassHighTech.com to ask what's up.
Update: an email from the magazine says that the patent count is supposed to represent just the ones from the New England area. That does clear out a lot of Pfizer ones which originated from Sandwich, St. Louis, and other exotic ports. But I still can't get the numbers to come out right. I looked through about a quarter of the 2009 US patents assigned to Pfizer, and found five or six out of Groton/New London just in that group. I've emailed the magazine again about this. . .
Comments (8)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Patents and IP
POST A COMMENT
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Shire's Replagal Problems: An Inside Look?
- › Bungled Structure, And How
- › Roche Closes Nutley, Once Its US R&D Home
- › The Next Five Years in the Drug Industry
- › A Kinase Inhibitor Learns Something New
- › The Good Ol' Friedel-Crafts
- › Merck's Madagascar Marketing Mess
- › Scientific Literacy: Where Do You Stop?
1. Greg Hlatky on March 31, 2010 9:21 AM writes...
Where are they getting these figures? When I checked, Pfizer had 97 granted U.S. patents in 2009, resolving themselves into 92 separate patent families. They had 100 basic patent publications in 2009.
Permalink to Comment2. petros on March 31, 2010 10:06 AM writes...
I wonder if they've just picked up on one of the company name variations.
Most major companies assign patents to diverse entities
Permalink to Comment3. SP on March 31, 2010 11:33 AM writes...
Since it's MassHighTech maybe they're only looking at patents issued to the Cambridge Pfizer site.
Permalink to Comment4. weirdo on March 31, 2010 3:30 PM writes...
So, am I to believe that "New London" is not part of "New England"?
Learn something new every day . . . .
Permalink to Comment5. waste of time on March 31, 2010 4:18 PM writes...
who cares? waste of time and energy.
Permalink to Comment6. medchem23 on April 1, 2010 3:46 AM writes...
yawn :oOOOOOOOOO
Permalink to Comment7. Another Kevin on April 1, 2010 9:18 AM writes...
Some Yankees don't think that Connecticut is New England:
"New England: An area of the United States comprising Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, sometimes Connecticut, and never New York."
Permalink to Comment8. Kris on April 2, 2010 7:24 PM writes...
Pfizer only files patents with commercial value and keeps the rest as trade secrets. It costs to file patents.
Permalink to Comment