2024 Patent Quality Rankings: The Top 50 Patent Law Firms

Patent Bots proofread an entire year of issued patents to determine the top 10 large patent firms and the top 50 overall.

Somerville, MA: Patent Bots, creator of AI-enabled software-as-a-service applications for patent attorneys, is pleased to announce its fifth annual Patent Quality Rankings of top patent law firms.

Patent Bots used its advanced machine learning software to review every patent issued by the USPTO in the past year. It then ranked the 730 patent law firms with 50+ patents issued based on the average number of numbering, antecedent basis, and word support errors detected in their patents. Rankings are based only on these errors and do not address many other important aspects of patent quality.

  • 323,820 patents processed by the Patent Bots AI
  • 36,824 (11.4%) patents with a perfect Patent Quality Score – up from 10.3% in 2023
  • 75 average errors per patent – down from 7.9 in 2023
  • 4 median errors per patent – down from 5 in 2023

The decline in errors per patent is not a one-year phenomenon. The average has declined nearly 25% in just five years – from 8.9 errors per patent in 2020 to an all-time low of 6.75 this year. The decrease coincides with the rise of automated patent proofreading tools like Patent Bots Prep & Pros Pro.

“I started Patent Bots six years ago because I saw the enormous value of automated proofreading in my own patent practice,” Patent Bots founder and practicing patent attorney Jeff O’Neill said. “The data is clear: Practitioners who use automated proofreading achieve a significant drop in their error rates.”

Despite the decline, Patent Bots detected at least one numbering, antecedent basis, or word support error in nearly 89% percent of patents issued last year.

“Errors in patents can increase the costs of obtaining a patent and lead to validity issues in the future,” O’Neill said. “Modern AI-enabled automated proofreading solutions like Patent Bots make it easy to fix errors and get better outcomes for clients.”

2024 Patent Quality Rankings: Top 10 Large Firms.

For the third consecutive year, Harrity & Harrity claimed the top ranking among patent firms with at least 500 patents issued in the last year.

Note: Some companies file their own patents rather than filing through outside counsel. In these instances, the company is both the patent filer AND the patent owner and is included in our rankings as both a firm and a company. The company rankings will be released later this year.

Rank Law Firm Patents Issued Quality Score
1 Harrity & Harrity, LLP 1274 98.9
2 Holland & Hart LLP 1596 97.1
3 QUALCOMM Incorporated 538 96.3
4 Global IP Counselors, LLP 559 88.9
5 Patterson + Sheridan, LLP 1591 88.7
6 Keating & Bennett, LLP 644 85.8
7 CHIP LAW GROUP 711 85.5
8 Lowenstein Sandler LLP 1054 < 85.2
9 Rankin, Hill & Clark LLP 605 < 85.2
10 Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP 748 < 85.2

2024 Patent Quality Rankings: Top 10 Firms Overall. 

FIG. 1 Patents jumped all the way from No. 8 in our 2023 rankings to place first among firms with 50+ patents issued.

View the entire 2024 Patent Bots Quality Rankings Top 50.

Rank Law Firm Patents Issued Quality Score
1 FIG. 1 Patents 266 99.6
2 Dierker & Kavanaugh, P.C. 53 99.3
3 Commvault Systems, Inc. 74 99.1
4 Harrity & Harrity, LLP 1274 98.9
5 The Pattani Law Group 139 98.1
6 Lindauer Law, PLLC 70 98
7 Holland & Hart LLP 1596 97.1
8 Duft & Bornsen, PC 137 97
9 QUALCOMM Incorporated 538 96.3
10 Ferguson Braswell Fraser Kubasta PC 119 96.3

About Patent Bots:  

Patent Bots balances complex AI and big data technology with a modern user-friendly interface to help patent attorneys streamline tedious day-to-day workflows, submit stronger patent applications, deliver results faster for clients, and improve their firms’ bottom lines.

The Patent Bots platform consists of four primary software-as-a-service applications.

Click here to learn more.


Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author as of the time of publication and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com.

Join the Discussion

No comments yet.