DEFINING PATENT QUALITY
Christi J. Guerrini
ABSTRACT
Depending on whom you ask, the state of U.S. patent quality is either dismal or
decent, in decline or on the upswing, in need of intervention or worthy of
commendation. Absent from the ongoing debate about the quality of U.S. patents,
however, is much thoughtful discussion about what constitutes a patent’s “quality”
in the first place. What features, or attributes, of a patent make it “good” in quality,
what attributes make it “bad” in quality, and how are those attributes related? The
answers to these questions give shape to an understanding of patent quality that is
central to determining whether there exists a crisis of patent quality, and if so,
which policies to develop and implement for the purpose of containing it.
The broad aim of this Article is to draw attention to the definition of patent
quality as an important subject of scholarly inquiry. Its more specific aim is to call
for a return to first principles and begin the process of developing a meaning and
theory of patent quality. It does so by deconstructing what constitutes a good
patent and a bad patent through the lens of the business quality literature and
according to theoretical descriptions of the patent system and the individuals and
institutions having a stake in the outcome. This Article concludes by proposing
definitions of ideal and sufficient patent quality that can provide useful guidance to
those who set the patent reform agenda.