Peer To Patent
Pilot 2 Results Released: Citizen-Experts Receive an A

Student reviewers led the charge in searching for and providing the patent examiner with relevant prior art. Their efforts further established that citizen-experts can include those who are professionals in the industry or anyone with an interest in the technology. Similar to the first pilot, these results showed that the citizen experts are effective in directing the patent examiner to prior art that would normally go undiscovered. Scalability was ultimately tested in Pilot 2. The results confirmed that citizen-experts are willing to autonomously expand to review new technologies.

To view Pilot 2 results, please follow here

Pilot 2 Prior Artist Awards

Prior Artist Awards are given to reviewers whose prior art was used by the patent examiner as a rejection basis in a USPTO office action.

And the awards go to…

Adam Roach *
Alberto Araiza *
Amanda Willis ******
Bindu Nair *
Christopher Illardi *********
Claude Baudin *
Diane Willis ***************
Durga Kandasam *
Eun Sol Cho *
Greg Rotz *
Haritha Tapa *
Helen Shi **
Jimmy Chen *
Lankeswararao Matti *
Manny Schecter *
Matthew Zehrer *
Paul Merolla *
Peter Lee *
Philip Jeng *
Rishi Rawat *
Rolando Bermudez *
Ryan O’Quinn ******
Stephanie Scott *
Steve Pearson **
Susan Murray ***
Thomas Irizarry *
Tibor Lobeskevki *
Timothy Myers *
Van Nguy *
William Pagan *
Yeen Tham ******

* Indicates the number of different prior art submissions referenced in an office action.
Bold indicates a student reviewer.

Final Results for Pilot One

When New York Law School’s Center for Patent Innovations last published a report on the Peer To Patent pilot in June 2009, we had incomplete data, as the work of our citizen reviewers was still underway. We now present the full results of that first pilot (June 15, 2007 to June 15, 2009) and those results demonstrate why the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office elected to conduct a second Peer To Patent pilot beginning in the Fall of 2010.

In addition to numerical analysis, narratives for patent applications are provided to illustrate the level of collaboration that took place within the reviewing community. Not only do these specific narratives highlight how patent examiners applied the reviewer submitted prior art, they also demonstrate the importance of community discussion. In essence, we found that collaboration is key to successful participation.

To view the report, please follow First Pilot Final Results

Peer To Patent Graduates!

If you have landed at this page thinking you were going to the Peer To Patent working page (formerly, it is because the project has completed its mission. The goal of Peer To Patent has been to demonstrate that citizen-expert could make a meaningful contribution to identifying useful prior art relevant to the examination of pending patent applications. After running two pilots in the U.S. (from 2007-2009 and 2010-2011), there can be little doubt as to the value of opening the prior art search process to volunteers. In fact, the project was so successful that the American Invents Act (AIA), signed into law in September 2011, makes provision for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to implement a Peer To Patent-type system. And that is just what is happening.

The USPTO is presently working on Phase I of its news third-party submissions system, a web-based portal where anyone will be able to submit prior art relevant to any pending, published patent application. You will no longer have to file prior art references in hard copy. You will no longer be prevented from providing an explanation of the relevance of the prior art (in fact, you will be expected to prior such explanation). You will no longer have to pay a fee to submit the prior art, at least for the first three references filed electronically on any one patent application (if you wish to file more than three references on an application, you will need to file the references beyond three through the traditional manual submission system and you will have to pay a fee for those references). The time for submitting prior art references will be longer than under Peer To Patent (although third-parties should make their submissions as early as possible following publication to assure the examiner has them before a first office action issues). Best of all, you will no longer be limited in the areas of technology for which prior art may be submitted. Everything is fair game! You can read more of the proposed rules around third party submissions here.

Phase I of the USPTO third-party submissions system is expected to be implemented no later than the anniversary of the signing of the AIA, i.e., September, 2012. In the meantime a task force at the USPTO is considering how the USPTO may provide the collaborative aspects of Peer To Patent - the work spaces, a discussion area, tagging, etc. In addition, at least one private entity is rumored to be working on the same sort of collaborative workspace, and we hope to see something substantive on that before the end of the summer of 2012.

Over the next month our New York Law School team will be publishing a full, final report of the first pilot (earlier anniversary reports were published before all of the project data was complete). We will also be publishing an interim report from the second pilot. So stay tuned.

For those who are interested in the data accumulated by Peer To Patent on the patent applications that went through peer review in either the first or second pilot, that data has been archived and is available for academic study. If you have an interest in accessing that data, please contact Naomi Allen, Institute Manager, Institute of Information Law and Policy, New York Law School at 212-431-2368 or naomi.allen at

For those academic institutions or national patent offices wishing to avail themselves of the software used to power Peer To Patent, that software is also available. Again, you should contact Ms. Allen.

Finally, we want to thank all of those who have supported the Peer To Patent project since its inception in 2005. The Omidyar Network and MacArthur Foundation provided critical funding throughout the project. Corporate sponsors provided both funding, expertise, and direction to the project. Those corporate sponsors include IBM, GE, Microsoft, Hewlett Packard, CA, Red Hat, Open Invention Network, Article One Partners, and Intellectual Ventures. Students were the backbone of this project, and we would like to recognize the students at New York Law School, Duke University School of Law, University of California School of Law, Brooklyn Law School, Notre Dame Law School, and Florida International University School of Law for all of their hard work. We would especially like to recognize Chris Wong, Tom Lemmo, Christina Segro and Andrea Casillas, our student project managers who provided leadership throughout the project. Last, but by no means least, we thank Beth Noveck of New York Law School for her innovative idea and Manny Schecter of IBM for his enthusiasm, guidance, and support over the past seven years.

Improving Patent Systems through Open Access

On October 20-21, 2011 New York Law School and Queensland University of Technology convened for the Second Annual Prior Art Collaboration Conference hosted by the US Patent and Trademark Office. This second international meeting joined those interested in improving our patent systems to discuss what has been happening, the results of the various Peer To Patent pilots, the assessment of participating examiners and how to improve access to prior art through open access.

Participants included representatives of the U.S. Patent Office, the U.K. Patent Office, Institute of Intellectual Property in Japan, the World Intellectual Property Organizations, the European Patent Office, the Korean Intellectual Property Office and IP Australia as well as applicant companies, participating peer reviewers and academics.

To view these proceedings please click here

For proceedings from our first roundtable, please follow

Prior Artists Awards

New Office Actions are posted and new Prior Artists have been awarded! Congratulations to our latest recipients whose prior art submissions were referenced by the patent examiner.

Ryan O’Quinn ****
Diane Willis ****
Christopher Ilardi **
Helen Shi **
Alberto Araiza *
Claude Boudoin *
Eun Sol Cho *
Thomas Irizarry *
Durga Kandasamy
Paul Merolla *
Bindu Nair *
Timothy Myers *
Van Nguy *
William Pagan *
Steve Pearson *
Rishi Rawatt *
Adam Roach *
Haritha Tapa *
Yeen Tham *
Amanda Willis *

* Indicates the number of reviewer submitted prior art referenced in an office action.
Bold Indicates a student reviewer.

Think you have what it takes to be a Prior Artist Award winner? Have a look at these applications and share your knowledge!

Prior Art needed!

These applications have 8 days left on Peer To Patent. Are they inventive? Let us know!

Apoptosis Inhibitor- Nihon University (Japan)
Parallel simulation using multiple co-simulators- Rocketick Technologies, LTD.
Method/system for processing messages and converged service system- ZTE Corporation


On September 16, 2011 President Obama signed the LEAHY–SMITH AMERICA INVENTS ACT. The Act will help American inventors receive patents on their inventions more efficiently by reducing delays and unnecessary litigation. The Act will also bring the US to the same level as the the majority of the world, by defining the effective filing date of an application as the “actual filing date.” There are many more important changes implemented by the Act, so take a further look as to what the new patent act will bring!

For the official text of the America Invents Act, please visit:

Also, check out President Obama at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology signing the act into law at:

Patent Quality Connection

This issue contains:
- Results of the P2P Australia Trial
- What does the Angry Birds Lawsuit say about the Patent System?
- Intellectual Property Office - Peer to Patent Pilot in the UK
- Webinar Recap: Best Practices to Avoid Patent Litigation
- AOP and P2P Featured Reviewers
- Featured Researcher

Check it out!