Marking a drop from its peak in the mid-1990s, the University failed again this year to make the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's list of the 10 universities that received the most patents in 2004.
For the 11th straight year, the University of California system topped the rankings, dominating the next-best California Institute of Technology with 424 patents to Caltech's 135. Penn, with 46 patents, is not yet ranked because the overall list has not been compiled. The University was consistently ranked among the top 10 in the late 1990s, reaching eighth in 1999.
Penn didn't even break into the list of organizations that received 40 or more patents during 2003.
Schools with many patents frequently earn significant returns. In fiscal year 2003, the UC system received over $67 million in royalties from its patents.
"The UC system is dedicated to research excellence and, as a public university, to research that contributes to economic prosperity and quality of life," UC spokesman Trey Davis said.
"As a result, that research consistently translates into patents, as an expression of publicly useful innovations," he added, noting the emphasis his state and university place on long-term investment in research.
Keri Mattox, Penn's director of economic partnerships, said that the University puts a great emphasis on research but faces a number of significant handicaps in competing with many of the schools at the top of these rankings.
"The University of California, the top-ranked university, is a system of 10 campuses, 208,000 students and 120,000 faculty -- compared to Penn's single campus," Mattox said in an e-mail interview. "Universities included in the list that are single-campus institutions ... have been involved in technology transfer far longer than the University of Pennsylvania."
Mattox added that there is a large lead time between being awarded a research grant and receiving a patent and that Penn has almost doubled research spending over the past decade.
"Penn's research funding ... grew [at] an annualized 10-year growth rate of 10 percent from 1992 to 2002 -- this growth is expected to impact patent generation in the coming years," Mattox said.
Perry Molinoff, Penn vice provost for research, said that the number of patents received forms just a single -- though important -- measurement of a university's competitiveness in research.
However, he said, factors such as licenses, start-ups created and especially income generated by innovations also need to be taken into consideration.
"Penn is very sophisticated in terms of technology. You have to look at a variety of ways of ranking," Molinoff said. "The bottom line is: How are you doing on income?"
In 2004, Penn's Center for Technology Transfer generated $12 million in license income.
Molinoff said that Penn's increased research spending is an example of the University's commitment to research and cited Columbia University's patent on the process of gene transfer as proof that one important patent can be more valuable to a school than many lesser ones.
"There are a limited number that make a big hit," Molinoff said. "But Penn gets about $750 million in research grants awarded, which typically puts us at the top two or three."
Columbia was ranked 10th on the 2004 patent list with 52.
