Patent Sales and Acquisitions

FlagshipIP is striving to come up with the optimal sale strategy for every client and every IP portfolio. Every patent sale project at FlagshipIP starts with thorough understanding of client’s needs:

Why are the patents being offered for sale?

Should the patents be licensed, sold or kept for defensive purposes?

Are enforcement options available?

Should the patents be bundled with other assets of the business?

Can the patents be used to raise money for business growth purposes?

Concentrating on these and many other IP strategy questions early on helps clients to understand available options and align the expectations accordingly.

FlagshipIP maintains a database of all issued US patents. We can gather intelligence on patent portfolios held by different companies. For example, the needs of large corporations can be identified by comparing patent holdings of a specific business to the patent holdings of its competitors.

FlagshipIP maintains a database of patent assignment records. We can identify companies buying and selling specific types of patents in specific technology fields. This knowledge is critical for proper identification of potential patent buyers for any given portfolio.

FlagshipIP frequently serves its clients based on success-fee arrangements, with the contingency fees ranging between 10% and 30%, depending on the scale and complexity of the project. FlagshipIP’s small but capable team of IP strategists, lawyers and engineers strive to achieve both quality and cost efficiency for clients.

Portfolio Analysis

We specialize in analysis and review of large patent portfolios. The need for such analysis frequently arises in a context of a portfolio acquisition or an M&A transaction.

The key to an efficient analysis of a large patent portfolio is human resource management. Unfortunately, the artificial intelligence alone, at the present state of technology, is not strong enough to identify valuable patents with a reasonable certainty, as good as experienced patent attorneys can.

The Artificial Intelligence and machine learning, however, has its place in our analysis. We use the algorithms in combination with our business, legal and technical judgement to subdivide large portfolios into 3 categories:

  • Category 1: patents that will be analyzed by our attorneys in detail
  • Category 2: patents that will be analyzed after we complete the analysis of Category 1
  • Category 3: patents that will not be reviewed manually

Category 1 is usually a reasonably small group consisting of, on average, 3%-5% of all patents in any given portfolio. These are the patents that appear to be (1) in most relevant technology classes, (2) with reasonably broad claims, (3) with early priority dates, (4) with a significant number of forward citations, (5) developed by reputable inventors and businesses.

Category 2 is larger group that usually ranges between 10% and 70% of the portfolio. The exact percentage depends on the portfolio and the desired depth of the review. These are the patents that appear to be valuable but require deeper research.  Going through all or some of these patents is mostly a decision determined by client’s budget.

Category 3 these are the patents that, according to our algorithms, are least likely to be valuable and they should only be looked if the review of the first two groups produced inconclusive results.

Patent Litigation and Source Code Discovery

Mr. Andreyev and his FlagshipIP team have successfully represented multiple clients in the US district courts and before the US International Trade Commission.

FlagshipIP also helps product companies defend against meritless patent infringement claims. We research the asserted patents and the accused products and come up with strategies that help our clients avoid costly litigations and burdensome license payments.

FlagshipIP specializes in computer source code discovery. Reviewing source code is a demanding task even for seasoned software engineers. A reviewer faces multiple challenges including terabytes of undocumented files, incomplete productions, “clean” rooms without access to the internet and documentation, poorly written and hard to decipher computer source code.

All FlagshipIP attorneys have technical degrees and significant engineering experience. Mr. Andreyev has been managing source code review projects since 2004. We have acquired and developed a set of source code review tools to greatly simplify and optimize the review process. Our tools can instantaneously search terabytes of data, generate production logs, graphically represent complex computer algorithms and perform many other tasks commonly involved in evidence gathering and claim chart generation.