IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/finlet/v70y2024ics1544612324013631.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The American Inventors Protection Act and the staggered market reaction to patent grants

Author

Listed:
  • Houston, Caleb M.
  • Roskelley, Kenneth D.

Abstract

Starting in December 2000, the American Inventors Protection Act requires patent applications to be announced 18 months after filing rather than when the patent is granted. We document that while the application and the patent grant announcements are associated with positive abnormal returns, this staggered information flow reduces the reaction to patent grants post-2001. Furthermore, more innovative patents obtain larger abnormal returns around both the patent grant and the application announcement. Returns to less innovative patents, however, concentrate on the grant date, consistent with the market perceiving the applications as less likely to be approved.

Suggested Citation

  • Houston, Caleb M. & Roskelley, Kenneth D., 2024. "The American Inventors Protection Act and the staggered market reaction to patent grants," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:70:y:2024:i:c:s1544612324013631
    DOI: 10.1016/j.frl.2024.106334
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1544612324013631
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.frl.2024.106334?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    2. Gautam Ahuja & Russell W. Coff & Peggy M. Lee, 2005. "Managerial foresight and attempted rent appropriation: insider trading on knowledge of imminent breakthroughs," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(9), pages 791-808, September.
    3. Arvid O. I. Hoffmann & Stefanie Kleimeier & Nagihan Mimiroglu & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2019. "The American Inventors Protection Act: A Natural Experiment on Innovation Disclosure and the Cost of Debt," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 641-651, September.
    4. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    5. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Lia Sheer, 2021. "Knowledge Spillovers and Corporate Investment in Scientific Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 871-898, March.
    6. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    7. Pakes, Ariel, 1985. "On Patents, R&D, and the Stock Market Rate of Return," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(2), pages 390-409, April.
    8. Johnson, Daniel K N & Popp, David, 2003. "Forced Out of the Closet: The Impact of the American Inventors Protection Act on the Timing of Patent Disclosure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(1), pages 96-112, Spring.
    9. Hoffmann, Arvid O.I. & Kleimeier, Stefanie, 2021. "How do banks finance R&D intensive firms? the role of patents in overcoming information asymmetry✰," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    10. Austin, David H, 1993. "An Event-Study Approach to Measuring Innovative Output: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 253-258, May.
    11. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Narayan, Seema & Tran, Vuong Thao, 2023. "Patent-related intellectual property and corporate investment," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    12. Mehdi Beyhaghi & Pooyan Khashabi & Ali Mohammadi, 2023. "Pre-grant Patent Disclosure and Analyst Forecast Accuracy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 3140-3155, May.
    13. Kim, Jinhwan & Valentine, Kristen, 2021. "The innovation consequences of mandatory patent disclosures," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2).
    14. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    15. Yu, Gun Jea & Hong, KiHoon, 2016. "Patents and R&D expenditure in explaining stock price movements," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 197-203.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen G. Dimmock & Jiekun Huang & Scott J. Weisbenner, 2022. "Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your High-Skilled Labor: H-1B Lottery Outcomes and Entrepreneurial Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6950-6970, September.
    2. Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), 2011. "The Economic Valuation of Patents," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13561, March.
    3. Serena Morricone & Raffaele Oriani, 2011. "Stock Market Valuation of Patent Portfolios," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 13, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. James M. Plečnik & Leo L. Yang & Joseph H. Zhang, 2022. "Corporate innovation and future earnings: does early patent disclosure matter?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(S1), pages 2011-2056, April.
    5. Antanina Garanasvili, 2019. "Global Recession Impact on the Market Value of Intangible Assets," 2019 Papers pga1043, Job Market Papers.
    6. Tseng, Kevin, 2022. "Learning from the Joneses: Technology spillover, innovation externality, and stock returns," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    7. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    8. Wu, Qiang & Dbouk, Wassim & Hasan, Iftekhar & Kobeissi, Nada & Zheng, Li, 2021. "Does gender affect innovation? Evidence from female chief technology officers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    9. Chen, Yangyang & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Podolski, Edward J. & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2024. "In the mood for creativity: Sunshine-induced mood, inventor performance, and firm value," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    10. Deepak Somaya & Ian O. Williamson & Xiaomeng Zhang, 2007. "Combining Patent Law Expertise with R&D for Patenting Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 922-937, December.
    11. Bai, Qing & Tian, Shaonan, 2020. "Innovate or die: Corporate innovation and bankruptcy forecasts," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 88-108.
    12. Belenzon, Sharon & Patacconi, Andrea, 2013. "Innovation and firm value: An investigation of the changing role of patents, 1985–2007," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1496-1510.
    13. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    14. Arora, Ashish & Cohen, Wesley & Lee, Honggi & Sebastian, Divya, 2023. "Invention value, inventive capability and the large firm advantage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    15. Jingoo Kang & Ribuga Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2017. "An empirical examination of vacillation theory," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1356-1370, June.
    16. Jingoo Kang & Sang‐Joon Kim, 2020. "Performance implications of incremental transition and discontinuous jump between exploration and exploitation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1083-1111, June.
    17. Gatchev, Vladimir A. & Pirinsky, Christo A. & Venugopal, Buvaneshwaran, 2022. "A language-based approach to measuring creative exploration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    18. Ma, Yu Luen & Ren, Yayuan, 2023. "InsurTech—Promise, threat or hype? Insights from stock market reaction to InsurTech innovation," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    19. Francis, Bill & Mani, Suresh Babu & Sharma, Zenu & Wu, Qiang, 2021. "The impact of organization capital on firm innovation," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    20. Hsu, David H. & Hsu, Po-Hsuan & Zhou, Tong & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2021. "Benchmarking U.S. university patent value and commercialization efforts: A new approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Firm Innovation; Patents; Abnormal Returns; Information Asymmetry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:finlet:v:70:y:2024:i:c:s1544612324013631. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/frl .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.