Director's Forum: David Kappos' Public Blog

Guest Blog by Administrator for Policy and External Affairs Albert Tramposch

The Office of Policy and External Affairs assists the USPTO Director in advising the President, through the Secretary of Commerce, and other federal agencies on domestic and international intellectual property policy. “External Affairs” or “EA,” as the office is commonly referred to, also promotes the development of intellectual property systems, nationally and internationally, and advocates improvements in training and protecting intellectual property throughout the world.

We are pleased to be launching the first External Affairs dashboard today, and to be providing data each quarter on the following metrics. 

(1) Number of Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) and Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)-PPH and cases filed in the USPTO

(2) Number of educational programs

(3) Number of attendees trained and the countries they represent

(4) Number of countries trained

The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is a framework in which an application whose claims have been determined to be patentable in one country's patent office, called the Office of First Filing (OFF), is eligible to go through an accelerated examination in another country's patent office, called the Office of Second Filing (OSF), with a simple procedure upon an applicant’s request. The PPH, through the use of the search and examination-related information produced by the first office, supports applicants in their efforts to obtain stable patent rights efficiently around the world, reduces the search/examination burden of the second office and improves the quality of the examination of the major patent offices in the world.

Under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), applicants may obtain search/examination results from an accredited "PCT authority." The USPTO has established agreements with several PCT authorities (OFF) to permit applicants to request PPH handling of their applications based on positive results from the PCT search  and examination. Called PCT-PPH, this enables patent applicants to request a fast-track examination procedure in participating offices (OSF) where patent examiners can make use of the work products from the other offices. By requesting that their applications be processed under this procedure, applicants can generally obtain patents more quickly before participating offices. Currently, the USPTO has PPH and PCT-PPH arrangements with 14 other offices.

The Office of Policy and External Affairs dashboard  shows the number of PPH cases filed with the USPTO.

In 2006, the USPTO established the Global Intellectual Property Academy (GIPA), and in 2007, USPTO completed construction of a permanent space for GIPA at the Alexandria, Va., campus.   GIPA offers capacity building programs in the United States and around the world on intellectual property protection, enforcement, and capitalization. Capacity-building programs are offered to patent, trademark and copyright officials, judges, prosecutors, police, customs officials, foreign policy makers, examiners and rights owners. In delivering capacity building programs, GIPA works closely with other United States government agencies, trading partners and international organizations. GIPA provides both multilateral programs and country specific programs. Some programs are developed to address specific legal issues, administrative issues and specific intellectual property areas. USPTO’s GIPA is instrumental in achieving the objectives of halting intellectual property theft and advancing international intellectual property policies.

The dashboard shows the number of educational programs, the number of  attendees  trained by GIPA and the number of countries that they represent.

We hope you’ll find the new USPTO Data Visualization Center  Office of Policy and External Affairs dashboard to be a valuable resource and we welcome any feedback you have on how we can make it even better.

As you may know, the FY 2011 budget was enacted on April 15, 2011 and contains the USPTO’s appropriation through the end of this fiscal year, September 30, 2011. With the enactment of the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011, our total spending authority for FY 2011 has been limited to $2.09 billion.

Given this level of spending authority, USPTO will have to make significant reductions for the current fiscal year.

We have not come by these decisions lightly; I recognize that these measures will create new challenges for our ability to carry out our agency’s mission, but we will continue seeking innovative ways to do more with less.

Effective immediately and until further notice:

• Track One of the Three-Track program, which offers expedited patent examination and was scheduled to go into effect on May 4, 2011, is postponed;

• The opening of the planned Nationwide Workforce satellite office in Detroit, as well as consideration of other possible satellite office locations, is postponed;

• Hiring—both for new positions and backfills—is frozen; 
  
• IT projects will be scaled back;
  
• Funding for Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) outsourcing will be substantially reduced;

• Employee training will be reduced;

• All overtime is suspended.

In addition, business units will be required to reduce all other non-compensation-related expenses, including travel, conferences and contracts.

Trademarks is unaffected and will maintain normal operations. 

I would like to thank our entire team for their continuing cooperation and patience, and for their dedication and service during this challenging time.

Posted at 09:08AM Apr 22, 2011 in USPTO  |  Comments[3]

From Director Kappos' blog, April 1, 2011:

I’d like to discuss patent petitions in general, and in particular, petition decisions. We’ve heard the complaints that it takes too long to get a decision from the Petitions Office.

To address this issue, we’ve just announced that we’re we're automating the filing and decision process for eight (8) patent petition types. These eight petition types cover approximately one-third of the work of the Petitions Office. They will join the two current types of petitions that can be decided electronically (petitions to make special on the basis of age and petitions to accept unintentionally delayed payment of the maintenance fee).

However, what we are initiating for the eight newly automated petitions is a departure from the established way to get a decision. We're automating the process using USPTO's new e-Petition system. With e-Petition, the petitions data is input through a secure web interface and at the push of a button the petition is decided. We are using webforms and an automated workflow to accomplish the task of deciding petitions filed using ePetition. This means that for these eight types of petitions when filed using ePetition, there will be no waiting for the petition to be docketed, no waiting for someone to decide the petition, and no waiting for the decision to be uploaded into Public PAIR.

The eight (8) petition types are as follows:

1. WITHDRAWAL OF ATTORNEY (37 CFR 1.36)

2. WITHDRAW FROM ISSUE AFTER PAYMENT OF ISSUE FEE

3. WITHDRAW FROM ISSUE AFTER PAYMENT OF ISSUE FEE (37 CFR 1.313(c))

4. WITHDRAW FROM ISSUE AFTER PAYMENT OF ISSUE FEE (37 CFR 1.313(c)(1) OR (2)) WITH ASSIGNED PATENT NUMBER

5. WITHDRAW FROM ISSUE UNDER 37 CFR 1.313(c)(3). APPLICATION IS EXPRESSLY ABANDONED.

6. PETITION TO ACCEPT LATE PAYMENT OF ISSUE FEE - UNINTENTIONAL LATE PAYMENT (37 CFR 1.155(c) OR 37 CFR 1.316)

7. PETITIONS UNDER 37 CFR 1.137(f)

8. PETITION TO REVIVE ABANDONED APPLICATION FOR CONTINUITY PURPOSES ONLY

I hope applicants will use the e-Petition system. By using e-Petition, petitioners will also now have more control over when their petitions are filed and answered. This is especially advantageous for critical petitions, such as petitions to withdraw from issue. And deciding petitions electronically will decrease the need for renewed petitions, since petitioners will know instantly whether all technical requirements have been met. Moreover, petitions processed and decided electronically will not add to the inventory of petitions awaiting decision, freeing up the resources currently used to decide these eight types of petitions.

So, processing and issuing more petition decisions electronically should provide an improvement in service to patent applicants, and help improve efficiency of the USPTO. For more specific details on e-Petitions, please see the FAQ’s at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/ePetition-FAQs.jsp. The ePetition system is a step forward in the journey of improving the patent system. In this regard, as always, your input on improving the ePetition system is important to us. Please give us your feedback.

Posted at 05:07PM Apr 01, 2011 in patents  |  Comments[0]

From David Kappos' blog, March 7:

In honor of Women’s History Month, I’d like to take a moment to talk about women’s contributions to our country’s innovation economy.  Throughout history, women have played a critical role as innovators, inventors, and entrepreneurs.  Take, for example, women inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame: Stephanie Kwolek, the inventor of Kevlar™; Elizabeth Hazen and Rachel Brown, the inventors of the antifungal antibiotic, Nystatin™; and Patsy Sherman, the inventor of Scotchgard™.  These breakthrough inventions are still in use today and have improved our world substantially.  These women and countless others set the example for women of all ages who are working diligently to bring their ideas, innovations, and inventions to the marketplace.
 
To help celebrate Women’s History Month and to bring attention to identifying opportunities that support and encourage women to become entrepreneurs and innovators, the USPTO and the United States Women's Chamber of Commerce (USWCC) are hosting a women’s entrepreneurship symposium on Friday, March 11, here at the USPTO.  Given that women-owned businesses make a significant impact on the U.S. economy, this event will focus on women entrepreneurs, the importance of intellectual property protection for their innovations, and how to leverage economic opportunities for women-owned businesses.   I am excited to welcome U.S. Senator Mary L. Landrieu (D-La.), chair of the Senate’s Small Business Committee, who will serve as the symposium’s keynote speaker.  Our newly appointed USPTO Deputy Director Terry Rea will provide opening remarks, and additional speakers will include leaders in business, law and government who will provide useful information on topics such as intellectual property protection, accessing financial resources, building business relationships and more.
 
According to the Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA), 7.8 million firms were owned by women in 2007, accounting for almost 30 percent of all non-farm, privately held U.S. firms.  Women-owned firms also had total receipts of $1.2 trillion in 2007, and employed 7.6 million workers. While these numbers reflect a very positive picture for women and one that continues to reflect growth, women inventors and entrepreneurs still face additional challenges to their success and remain behind men in earning power both in the corporate world and as business owners. According to the United States Women’s Chamber of Commerce (USWCC), women-owned firms make $0.75 for every $1 earned by firms owned by men.
 
I hope that both women and men will join together at the USPTO for this unique event.  The symposium will be held from 9:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Va. Registration for this one-day event is $41.00 and includes all conference sessions and materials, light refreshments, a keynote luncheon and a networking reception. For more information, contact the USPTO at 571-272-8850.  To view the full agenda and register, go to: http://www.uswcc.org/meetings/womens-entrepreneurship-symposium-presented-by-the.html

As always, your comments and input are welcomed. I look forward to your feedback.

From Guest Blogger, Commissioner Stoll, on March 11:

The dashboard for the month of February has been released and is on our website. We have added a new quality measure, “Quality Index Report (QIR).”  QIR, one of the factors making up the new composite quality metric that was recently announced, tracks the actions taken by examiners during prosecution of patent applications.  The QIR is a statistical analysis of quality-related events in the prosecution, such as the reopening of final rejections and second non-final actions.  Identifying quality issues prior to final action allows for corrective actions to be taken via coaching/mentoring and training. 

The new quality composite greatly expands the previous procedures for measurement of examination quality.  The effort is the result of collaboration between the USPTO, the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) Quality Task Force and the patent community.  The dashboard continues to show the two historical quality measures of Final Disposition Compliance Rate and the In-Process Compliance Rate; these continue to be on target.

Traditional first action pendency increased only slightly to an average of 24.5 months for February up from 24.2 months in January, while traditional total pendency decreased from 34.5 months in January to 34.0 months in February.  The USPTO continues to focus on reducing the backlog and first action pendency in order to achieve overall pendency and backlog goals.  

Our Clearing Oldest Patent Applications (COPA) initiative continues to see great progress as the number of First Actions on cases older than 16 months chips away at the “tail.”   This month there were 233,780 cases remaining in the tail.  The preliminary UPR filing data through February shows that 202,456 applications have been received by the office to date this fiscal year, versus 186,065 over the same time last year.  The backlog of applications awaiting first office action by examiners decreased this month to 715,461. 

We think these metrics show some great progress.  And, on a related note, I want to personally thank everyone worked so hard to ensure the passage of S. 23, the America Invents Act of 2011.  The bill will provide the USPTO the needed resources to improve patent quality and reduce pendency, which will help innovators bring their products to market, build businesses and create much-needed new jobs.  Our hope is that the House will quickly act on patent reform as well.

Thanks for your ongoing support and I look forward to your feedback.

From David Kappos' blog, March 16:

I had the great pleasure of being in Austin, Texas last weekend for something new and special—not only for me but for the USPTO. The SXSW (South by Southwest) Interactive Conference has been a major destination for technologists for a number of years now and a hotbed destination for many of this country’s prime innovators and entrepreneurs. I spoke at two SXSW Interactive sessions, a great opportunity for us to connect with some new audiences.

At each session we were able to meet and speak with some of the sharpest minds of a young, hipster and entrepreneurial set. Smart, enthusiastic, dedicated—this is both the face of the future of American innovation, and in many notable cases its present face. Like our employees at USPTO, the US innovation community is changing, and we are finding new ways to keep pace with them, on their terms.

We are of course committed to informing and encouraging all of those working in the field of IP. Not only do we have to help support and nurture the cutting edge ideas coming from seasoned professionals, but we must also be there for young people in their teens and twenties, many of whom are creating startups that may employ tens or even thousands within just a couple of years.

We're also aware that even in the growing world of open source, inventive ideas are still property for those who wish to treat them that way by seeking patent protection. Moreover, the open source model itself is highly dependent on the copyright laws as the vehicle for securing the contractual commitments that underpin the open source development model.

And another point that bears remembering: Patent infringement, piracy, copyright infringement and the like steal from our nation’s creators and go-getters. Significantly, they also steal jobs from the US economy. No legitimate business model condones stealing.

Being in Austin surrounded by thousands of innovators and entrepreneurs was inspiring. The USPTO stands ready to assist these innovators as they pursue their dreams. In fact we're not waiting—we're reaching out to them every chance we get!

From David Kappos, Wednesday, March 2:

Today I thought I would offer my thinking on a topic that is getting a lot of attention these days—patent reform. The 21st century, an undoubtedly technological one, demands a strong, clear and expedient patent system to ensure American competitiveness. Presently, that system is in immediate need of attention. That is why President Obama, Secretary Locke and I support Senate passage of S.23, the America Invents Act of 2011.

As outlined in our official Statement of Administration Policy released this week, the legislation updates our patent system by offering greater certainty about patent rights, lower fees for independent inventors and micro-entities and faster alternatives to expensive litigation. Moreover, it enables a financially stable USPTO that promotes growth for innovators in all industries and of all sizes.

I speak regularly with successful inventors, and they tell me exactly what they need to succeed: secure patent rights in order to access capital, hire employees, and build their companies. This demands a swift and efficient system that doesn't leave intellectual property clogged in the pipelines. S.23 would enable the USPTO to set its fees and recover the actual cost of the services we provide to inventors without costing the taxpayer a dime. By providing our Agency with adequate resources, delays will be minimized and high-quality examinations will be completed in a shorter amount of time. This will help to clear the patent backlog and allow innovators to move ideas to the marketplace more quickly.

By moving the United States to a First-Inventor-to-File (FITF) system, the bill establishes greater speed and certainty about property rights in the innovation marketplace, while also leveling the playing field for anyone seeking to participate in global commerce. While I recognize some have concerns about this switch, the reality is that the current First-to-Invent system is fraught with peril.  Under the current system, a host of objections can be raised in litigation that undermine a patentee’s rights. Such litigation is expensive and time consuming.

Passage of this legislation will also reduce the prohibitive cost of challenging issued patents by creating an in-house post-grant review process which will provide a faster and much cheaper alternative to costly and drawn-out litigation.

Enabling growth for industries of all sizes optimizes our ability to spur innovation, create new jobs, carve out new industries and enable new services to address social needs. 

In the past 50 years we have seen more technological advancements than at any point in history but with no comprehensive patent reform to keep up with the times. In this century, we can’t expect tomorrow’s economy to take root using yesterday’s infrastructure. In order to bring ideas to market—in order to get ideas to capture funding—we must adopt a system that is more efficient for all who use it.

By enacting this bill, we’ll be able to revitalize our economy, unleash American creativity and win the future by catalyzing new industries that keep us competitive for generations to come.

Thanks for your continued support of the USPTO.  As always, I’m interested to know what you think—in this case, about patent reform.

Posting from Director Kappos, Feb. 7:

Many independent inventors and small businesses have discovered that there is a free resource in their state, possibly even their own city, to assist them on their quest to successfully protect and market their inventions.  The USPTO partners with over 80 libraries in 45 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, to provide access to and training on U.S. patent and trademark information via the Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program (PTDLP).

One of my goals this year is to both revitalize and rebrand the program to reflect the 21^st century focus on electronic information dissemination and training.   As part of this initiative, the USPTO is conducting a public roundtable to obtain input from organizations and individuals on current use of the PTDLs as well as how we can make them more useful, and a more substantial resource, in the future.  The roundtable will be held on February 15, 2011, from 1:30-3:00p.m. (ET) at the USPTO headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia and will also be webcast. 

PTDLs are the face of USPTO in local communities – promoting a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship.  Specially trained staff show you how to perform a preliminary patent or trademark search using the search tools on the USPTO website.  Staff cannot provide legal advice, but will show you how to locate legal practitioners to meet your needs.  PTDLs also have access to a public version of the Web Based Examiner’s Search Tool (PubWEST), and staff can teach you how to use its powerful search features.  These are some of the current services being offered at PTDLs.  We would like your input on additional services you would find helpful.

Members of the public are welcome to attend the meeting. Limited seating is available on a first-come, first-served basis in the Madison Auditorium on the concourse level of the Madison Building, which is located at 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.  To access the webcast, visit: https://uspto.connectsolutions.com/ptdlp021511/

Written comments may also be sent via e-mail to PTDL_comments@uspto.gov.

Thank you for your comments and for your continuing interest in improving the USPTO and our services to America's innovation community.

Posting from Director Kappos, Jan. 31st:

We were recently honored to have EPO President Benoît Battistelli address the staff of the USPTO.  In his address, President Battistelli mentioned the importance of the PCT and applauded USPTO's efforts to make improvements under the PCT.  As such, I thought I’d take the opportunity to update you on what we’ve been doing with regard to PCT processing here at the USPTO.

The PCT Task Force, created in the fall of 2009 and comprised of individuals from Patent Operations, PCT Legal Administration, PCT Operations and External Affairs, held a public meeting in February 2010 to hear comments on how the USPTO could improve its performance as a Receiving Office (RO), an International Searching Authority (ISA), an International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA) and as a national Office.  The feedback we  received indicated that we needed to improve the timeliness of our processing and the quality of our work products so that  more reliance can be given in national phase applications (35 U.S.C. 371 applications) to the search reports, written opinions and international preliminary examination reports prepared by the USPTO.

The Task Force has indeed focused on addressing the input we received from the IP community: improving timeliness of processing and quality of work products to maximize re-use potential.  I’m extremely happy with the progress so far and am pleased to report on some of our achievements.  In fiscal year 2010, the U.S. Receiving Office averaged just 13 days for processing new international applications compared to 60 days in FY2008.  As an ISA, we mailed 82% of our search reports and written opinions within 16 months from priority and 91% within 18 months in FY2010.  That is a huge improvement over the 23% and 37%, respectively, from 2008.  Further, the national phase processing division of PCT Operations improved their pre-exam processing time for 35 U.S.C. 371 applications by 33% in FY2010.  As to quality, we made modifications to PCT outsourcing contracts to improve the quality of our contractor-prepared search reports and written opinions, provided our contractors with training on classification, claim interpretation, and search strategy, and are now making a detailed search history of record in international applications along with the search report and written opinion.

Although these improvements are significant, we still have work to do.  To start, we will continue to work with our contractors to improve the quality of the international searches and written opinions.  Also, since the timeliness of our international preliminary examination reports under Chapter II of the PCT is not satisfactory, we are in the process of remapping our entire Chapter II process to find areas where we can make improvements.  We are also further automating a number of processes, including the retrieval of PCT documents from the International Bureau for construction of 35 U.S.C. 371 applications and the transmittal of search copies of international applications to foreign International Searching Authorities.

We will also continue partnering with other IP Offices.  Within the Trilateral context, we are doing a study on ISR re-use in national phase applications and will be working closely with the EPO and JPO to develop metrics to understand the extent of re-use and ways to enhance re-use potential in the future.  Additionally, the USPTO, EPO and KIPO have recently concluded a Collaborative International Search and Examination pilot in which examiners from our Offices worked together to produce international  search reports and written opinions.  This pilot tested the feasibility of collaborative international searches and provided a general assessment of quality. A second larger phase of this pilot is planned for 2011 to build upon the lessons learned from the first phase and to provide a quantitative assessment of collaborative international search and examination.

So, my thanks for the great job done by our USPTO PCT Task Force.  We’ve made really fine progress to date thanks to your diligent, thoughtful work.  And I look forward to announcing more PCT achievements in 2011.

Posting from Director Kappos, Jan. 24th:

Since my first days at the USPTO, I’ve been committed to modernizing our outdated IT infrastructure. Modern tools are a cornerstone of our strategic direction to leverage 21st century technology to make your work easier, faster, and better. To deliver on that promise, and to rapidly transform our systems to achieve the agency’s goals, it’s essential that the USPTO learn to be more nimble in our approach to modernizing our systems.
 
Last May, John Owens, our CIO, directed a top to bottom review and enhancement of our procedure for developing IT products to embrace the “agile” development methodology. Traditionally, the USPTO utilized a “waterfall”’ development methodology that was characterized by several serial phases that resulted in long, drawn out delivery cycles.  As a result, users had to wait many months and often years, to receive new functionality and tools with no guarantee that the delivered product would satisfy their needs.  By contrast, agile is an iterative development methodology commonly used outside of the federal arena and is embraced at many successful technology companies. Agile emphasizes rapid delivery and user involvement from the beginning, to ensure successful delivery of tools that the users want and need. 
 
In December, Vivek Kundra, the U.S. Chief Information Officer, unveiled an ambitious 25 point plan to reform federal information technology management. Included in this plan are agile techniques. Namely to take smaller steps, tweak them based on feedback from our stakeholders and current business needs, and end up with systems that deliver higher value and increased user satisfaction.

Agile does three fundamental things that are different from traditional methods. First, agile embraces change as a constant. Change is expected, constantly planned for, and prioritized in real-time as business needs change. Second, agile time-boxes risk into 30-90 day “sprints.” This “if you’re going to fail, fail early” risks only 30-90 days’ worth of project time instead of finding issues or quality concerns late in a multi-month or multi-year project. Finally, agile techniques allow us to incrementally deliver higher quality products with improved features that are based on our users’ needs.
 
Agile requires cultural change to be successful. The project teams contain users who interact and test throughout the sprint. The user can work with and exercise the results of the sprint and provide valuable feedback that can be quickly integrated into future iterations. Users can therefore see results and improvements in months rather than years! 
 
We’ve made substantial progress in USPTO’s understanding of agile and are beginning to pilot several smaller initiatives using this new methodology. We hope to have a better understanding and more established processes for working in this environment in the coming months so that we can leverage this experience for marquee programs like “Patent End to End” and “Trademarks Next Generation.” Additionally we are launching extensive training for IT staff and users in agile and we are hiring program managers with deep agile.
 
As with all cultural changes, this one does come with some risks. As I mentioned, agile embraces, expects, and plans for changes, and to some extent failures, but due to the limited nature of the sprints, the risk and costs of such failures are small. Now it’s up to us to educate ourselves, stakeholders, users, customers and support the CIO that this is all part of the process and ultimately results in a much better product for the end users.
 
I applaud the hard working staff of the CIO’s office and other business units for undertaking this transition.  I know embracing change can be difficult, but as we mature our understanding and acceptance of the principles of rapid development and delivery, we will all benefit by the delivery of modern and improved tools and technologies used in industry for over a decade to deliver high-value business functions faster.

Posting from Director Kappos, January 14th:

If you’ve been following along with my blog for a while, you already know we’ve been looking at ways to reengineer the MPEP and TMEP.  In Part 2 of this series we reported that one important part of the new MPEP/TMEP philosophy would be continuous outreach and collaboration with the IP community to ensure the documents are accurate and current and maximally effective.  There was broad consensus that there should be a tool that allows for outside contributions to the content of these manuals while ensuring that the USPTO is the keeper of the official versions of the documents.

I’m thrilled to announce to our readers that we have now put out what we believe is a radically new way for us to work in collaboration with colleagues and stakeholders in getting this important job done. The vehicle we chose to bring that philosophy to action is the Internet, more specifically an online discussion tool. Now for the first time in history, the IP world can work with the USPTO, together and collaboratively make the MPEP and TMEP into state-of-the-art practice documents.

Now what we're looking for is the IP community to get involved.  Go to the MPEP or the TMEP discussion websites.  Check them out.  Join the discussion.  Contribute to improve the MPEP and TMEP.

We'll be featuring a few chapters from each document on a rolling basis, so the opportunities to have a positive impact will be indefinite in duration.

Guest Posting from Commissioner Robert Stoll, Jan. 13

Special Guest Blog by USPTO Commissioner for Patents Bob Stoll

In July, I wrote about RCE filings in response to applicant concerns and discussed in detail the whys and hows of RCE filing.  I realized the level of interest in tracking RCEs, so we created a new metric on our Dashboard.  The new measure, “Pendency from RCE Filing to Next Office Action” tracks pendency from time of the RCE filing to the mailing of the next office action.  We present the metric as an average of all RCE filings.  In December, the average time for this metric increased to 2.9 months from 2.6 months in November.  We are hoping that this measure provides you with another facet of the patent prosecution system. 

Our first quarter numbers look consistent or better than last year at this time.  Looking at the traditional first action pendency it has declined again to an average of 24.6 months in December from 24.9 months in November.  In addition, traditional total pendency remained unchanged from the previous month at 34.9 months.  The USPTO continues to focus on reducing first action pendency in order to achieve overall pendency and backlog goals, and recent results have already reflected this focus. 

Our filing numbers show a slight increase over last year, and this supports the larger economic picture of a slowly recovering economy.  Preliminary UPR filing data through December shows that 124,056 applications have been received by the office to date this fiscal year, versus 116,331 over the same time last year.  The backlog of applications awaiting first office action by examiners increased this month to 721,831. 

Although not on our dashboard, we want to continue to provide you with updates on our Green Technology Pilot Program.  As we last reported in November 2010, the Green Technology program was expanded and today the program is starting to take off.  The expanded program is now open to any unexamined application. We have received 149 new petitions since November and nearly 1,000 applications have fast-tracked through this program.  Of these applications, we have issued 156 patents since the program was launched a little more than one year ago.  As Director Kappos noted in this blog, applicants who are using the program are seeing great results. In several cases, patent applications in the Green Technology Program have been issued within a year of the filing date.  We foresee our Green Tech program playing a key role in fostering a foundation for growth and job creation in this emerging and important industry sector.

From Director Kappos' blog, Jan. 3:

As the Patents organization moves toward its goal of reducing the average total pendency of patent applications to 20 months by 2015, it is important to streamline all components of the examination process.  Everyone plays a role – including of course our examiners and our quality assurance professionals and our searchers and our management team, as well as all of our support functions and our Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and Central Reexamination Unit.  The technical support staff plays a crucial role in this effort.  And they are making substantial progress.  I’d like to highlight areas where our technical support team is achieving real results. 

In FY 2010 the Technology Center Technical Support Staff of 274 legal instrument examiners and legal document review clerks:

• Entered more than 2.9 million documents;
• Verified more than 264,000 allowed patent applications;
• Reviewed and counted over 2,300,000 office actions; and
• Processed more than 257,000 new patent applications.

These stats represented all-time records for the USPTO, reflecting all-time record workflow through the Agency including interviews conducted, office actions processed, notices of allowance, and final rejections. 

An example of the incredible effort put forth by our technical support staff is the reduction of amendment entry times over the 2009 fiscal year.  At the end of FY 2009, the backlog of documents to be entered was over 170,000 and the average amendment entry time was 34.5 days.  Not good at all.  In response, the head supervisory legal instrument examiners reengineered the work distribution process to better balance workflow, and to ensure that all documents were entered in date order.  As a result of their determined reengineering efforts, as of October 2010 the backlog of documents was reduced to about 15,000, with amendments being entered in 5.2 days on average.  Additionally, the backlog of new applications to be processed was reduced from over 100,000 in FY 2009 to just 13,000 as of October 2010. 

These are, quite simply, jaw-dropping improvements.  And to top off the performance, the team engineered this dramatic reduction in the backlog of documents to be entered while at the same time maintaining the timeliness of other critical areas of their work processes.  Really excellent.

A second example: Our post-examination technical support team has recently begun to focus on its cycle times.  It faces the unique challenge of handling the increased rate of patent issuances coming through as we work off our backlog of unexamined patent applications.  So just to keep pace, this team had to handle an increase of some 40,000 utility patents issuing in FY 2010 over FY2009. Building on successful process improvement efforts in the printer rush area from early in FY10 (printer rushes occur when an application has been allowed by the examiner, but a technical issue like claim renumbering causes the application to drop out of the issuance queue, requiring attention by technical support staff), the post-examination program analysts and quality control specialists established electronic upload and automated tracking of printer rush queries.  As a means of reducing paper-based and e-mail inefficiencies, the team also improved its automation capability so that the post-examination applicant service representatives were able to immediately enter applicant's application data to facilitate issuance.

Here are the results so far from this effort:

• For FY 2009, the average time from applicant's issue fee payment to issuance was 50 calendar days for 165,212 applications.
• For FY 2010, the average time from applicant's issue fee payment to issuance was 51 calendar days for 207,915.
• For FY 2011 to-date, the average time from applicant's issue fee payment to issuance is running at 43 calendar days for 39,064 applications.

This is an impressive eight-day (better than 15 percent) improvement in cycle time in less than one quarter.  While there is more to do, the technical support team is again showing that it can achieve excellent results in cutting its processing times at USPTO.

So whether you are a USPTO employee, or a patent applicant, or a member of the patent bar prosecuting applications in front of the Agency, if you’ve been noticing processing times speeding up, now you know who is making that happen behind the scenes: our outstanding technical support staff.

I would like to thank and recognize the technical support staff – of course for the Patents organization but also throughout the USPTO -- for your hard work and dedication, and most importantly for your clear, measurable accomplishments.  Reducing pendency is a challenging goal, requiring team effort among all employees playing a role in patent application processing.  The technical support staff’s contributions are vital to our Agency putting Americans to work, putting new products and services into the marketplace, and creating opportunity for our country and for the world. 

Posted at 09:40AM Jan 03, 2011 in patents  |  Comments[1]

From guest post from Commissioner Stoll, Dec. 10:

Special Guest Blog by USPTO Commissioner for Patents Bob Stoll

Traditional first action pendency declined again to an average of 24.9 months for November from 25.4 months in October.  In addition, traditional total pendency decreased from an average of 35.3 months to 34.9 months.  The Patent Business Unit is currently focusing on reducing first action pendency in order to achieve the overall pendency and backlog goals, and recent results have already reflected this focus.  Our ability to achieve these goals may be impacted by several factors, including: application filings, which may be largely driven by the economy; improvements in process efficiencies and elimination of redundancies; the retention rate of examiners; our ability to outsource foreign (PCT) applications processing; use of overtime; and our ability to hire new examiners.  The timing and interaction of these factors have significant impact on our long-term goals, and greatly affect our interim result at any given time.

Overall, though, in looking at the November 2010 data, it is important to remember that many of statistics on the dashboard are displayed as fiscal year averages. Since it is the second month of the new fiscal year, it is not uncommon to see a slight dip in some of the numbers. For example, the UPR allowance rate is a fiscal year average and historically there is a drop in this rate at the beginning of each fiscal year.

The backlog of applications awaiting first office action by examiners increased this month to 719,176.  Historically, we see similar growth in the backlog at the start of each fiscal year.  Preliminary UPR filing data through November shows that 79,878 applications have been received by the Office, versus 74,381 over the same time last year. The successful Green Technology program continues to show strong growth. Total petitions received to date have increased to 1,761, with an overall approval rate of 52.7%.   In addition, 120 patents have been issued under this program.

As always, we will continue to respond to the needs of our stakeholders by enhancing the information available and making adjustments to improve the user experience.

From Director Kappos' blog November 22:

Recently we announced the extension of the deadline to participate in the USPTO’s Green Technology Pilot until December 31, 2011, or until 3,000 applications have been accepted into the pilot.  Additionally we have eliminated the previous requirement that Green Technology Patent applications had to be filed with the USPTO before December 8, 2009, in order to be eligible for consideration under the program.

Meanwhile, the pace of innovation is increasing in all areas of green technology -- wind, solar, fuel cells, biomass, and geothermal, to name a few -- and I believe the USPTO should assist the inventor community in seeing the results of their efforts more quickly.  So now, all unexamined pending and newly filed applications that qualify are eligible for participation in this pilot.

I am really pleased with this latest expansion of our Green Technology Pilot program, and with the reaction of our user community.  A year ago, I wrote that if successful, the program may be expanded down the road. Well, here we are, down the road, and we have successfully accelerated the examination of many green technology patent applications.  To date, there have been some 800 petitions granted for entry into the Green Technology Pilot, and 106 of these applications with granted petitions have already been issued as U.S. patents. 

Program statistics show that stakeholders participating in the Green Tech Pilot can obtain patents much more quickly as compared to the standard examination process.  Currently, the average time between granting of a Green Technology petition and first office action on the merits is just 49 days.  In many instances, applicants have had their Green Technology inventions patented in less than one year from the application filing date. 

Julie Muyco, patent agent for Calera Corporation, noted, “Calera Corporation found that participating in the Green Technology Pilot Program has been extremely beneficial.  Our participating applications were accelerated by more than a year and examined by responsive, cooperative examiners who were willing to work with us to define patentable subject matter in an expedient manner.”

Similar sentiments were expressed by Matt Prater, Patent Attorney for Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, who noted, “I used the Green Technology Pilot Program to go from filing to allowance in 13 months.”  Mr. Prater also noted that the accelerated examination accorded to Green patent applications provided “a great outcome for my client.” 

Palo Alto-based attorney Richard Ogawa shared his own success with the program with Bloomberg News.  He told reporter Susan Decker that his clients who used the Green Technology Pilot have been able to get their patents examined much more quickly and that they intend to seek more patents under the program.

Skyline Solar, manufacturer of High Gain Solar (HGS) arrays for the commercial, industrial, government and utility markets, recently announced that it has secured two patents through the Green Technology Pilot.  In its press release, CEO Thomas Rohrs said, "The Green Technology Pilot Program has been critical to establishing the integrity of our intellectual property with potential customers, partners and investors, and has had a significant impact on the solar industry as a whole.”

Under the expansion of this pilot, we continue to advance the examination of green technology patents. And, earlier issuance of green technology patents enables inventors to secure funding, create new jobs and businesses, and bring vital green technologies into use much sooner.  

I am extremely proud of the dedication that our patent examiners, union partners, and management at the USPTO have shown in support of this effort. And I'm thankful for the trust U.S. innovators have put in us by using the program so vigorously.

I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on the pilot. What, if anything, can we do to enhance the program further, and how can we encourage more applicants to take advantage of it? Any ideas or solutions you have, please send them along.

From David Kappos' post October 22:

Special Guest Blog by USPTO Deputy Director Sharon Barner

Director Kappos and I are pleased to announce the release of the final version of the USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan at www.uspto.gov/strategicplan2010.

The plan is designed to strengthen the capacity of the USPTO to achieve its goals, improve the quality of patents and trademarks issued, and shorten the time it takes to get a patent.  The plan, as fully implemented, will enhance and accelerate the innovation and job growth needed to transform the U.S. economy, foster competitiveness, and drive the creation and growth of U.S. businesses.

A key feature of the USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan is the Balanced Scorecard—a detailed chart showing how each of our many initiatives supports a particular goal, along with associated performance metrics linked to action plans that will provide meaningful information on the status and performance of each initiative.  This scorecard will be used as a management tool: progress under the plan will be reported to Director Kappos and senior management on a regular basis.

In developing this plan, we solicited input from interested parties, including the public, stakeholders, and employees.  Three employee sessions were held on July 20-22 to present the draft and to solicit employee feedback.  We presented the draft to our Patent Public Advisory Committee and the Trademark Public Advisory Committee.  We also posted the draft on our Web site, published a Federal Register notice announcing its availability for review and comment, and created a dedicated email address for the purpose of obtaining comments.  Finally, we shared a draft of the plan with the Department of Commerce, the Office of Management and Budget, and Congress. 

We took your feedback seriously.  Let me list a few examples of how the plan was improved based on comments from our employees and the public.  Based on your feedback, we have:

• Aligned every goal, objective, and initiative in the Balanced Scorecard so that they correspond exactly with the DOC themes and USPTO goals and objectives described in greater detail the preceding text of the plan;
• Added an initiative to consolidate the oversight and coordination of the USPTO’s many educational and outreach initiatives, including those focused on elementary, middle school, high school, and university students;
• Added greater emphasis on the quality and timeliness of international search reports and written opinions, thereby maximizing the potential for re-use of work in the Patent Cooperation Treaty national phase;
• Emphasized that “work sharing” implies the leveraging, or reutilization of work to the maximum extent reasonable, rather than mutual recognition.

These are just some examples of how comments such as yours have shaped our plan.  To the extent that comments were focused on the implementation details of a particular initiative, they will be considered during the design and implementation phase of that initiative.  You will have additional opportunities to submit comments when these initiatives are announced in the Federal Register, at public roundtables, and here on this blog.

Thank you again for your comments and for your continuing interest in improving the USPTO.

From Director Kappos' blog October 13:

It is great to see the comments we’ve received since posting the initial Data Visualization Center dashboard on September 7.  Beginning this month, the USPTO will provide updates to the dashboard on or about the 10th of each. Month. 

 The September data we are posting presently shows a significant decrease in the backlog – down to 708,000 -- coupled with improvements in quality and increases in our work output across the board – from allowances to rejections to interviews, to name a few items.  In short, we are doing more of everything and we think that is a good thing.

 All in all, Fiscal Year 2010 was a remarkable year for our Patents team and the September dashboard data reflects that.   During the last 12 months, patent processing systems were closely studied to determine where improvements could be made to provide the greatest increase in efficiency, examination capacity, and workflow.  Patents then executed these improvements across the board.

 The Compact Prosecution concept is a collection of changes in examination practice and culture.  They encourage examiners to find the core issues in a patent application and resolve those issues early in prosecution.  The result is reflected in the September data postings which show a decrease in actions per disposal.

 Overall in FY 2010, the allowance rate increased to 45.6%, compared to an allowance rate of 41.3% in FY 2009.  In addition, actions per disposal decreased to 2.42 from 2.73 in FY 2009.  Furthermore, as a result of a concerted campaign to begin turning the tide on our backlog, the patent application backlog dropped from 718,835 at the end of FY 2009, to 708,535 at the end of FY 2010.  Pretty remarkable considering that application filings were up about 4%, that our examiner workforce shrunk and we were unable to authorize overtime for most of the year due to funding challenges, and that we affirmatively gave our examiners *more* time to examine each application as a clear signal that quality is our first priority.

 Finally, the September figures show that there has been a further improvement in patent examination quality.  The final rejection and allowance compliance rates (our existing quality measures previous to our announcement just last week of 5 new quality measures we will use starting immediately) increased from 94.4% in FY 2009 to 96.3% in FY 2010, and the non-final in-process compliance rate increased from 93.6% in FY 2009 to 94.9% in FY 2010.

 So, while we still have a lot of work to do, I think we are on the right path.  I’ll look forward to reviewing the monthly updates to the Dashboard, and I hope you will review them also each month to keep up with our progress and challenges at USPTO.

From Director Kappos' blog, October 1:

Increased globalization has taken its toll on IP Offices throughout the world. We see the phenomenon of increased filings and workload in many countries, including the United States and others, particularly in Europe and Asia. The surge in patent filings has created workload challenges everywhere.

Because of the fragmented nature of the global patent system, applicants must file multiple patent applications in different countries to protect a single invention. This leads to redundancy in search and examination, creating inefficiencies and additional costs for applicants. It also means that IP Offices around the world are duplicating a substantial amount of work.

At the USPTO we have the responsibility to lead in the development of a patent system that reflects the economic needs and interests of the global marketplace. Given the current backlog, delays between filing and examination create significant problems for innovators and investors. Because we all have a shared interest in a patent system that promotes a timely and accurate resolution of rights, it is one of my top priorities to better manage our workload. This issue was the focus of many of the discussions that Deputy Director Barner and I had on the margins of the WIPO General Assemblies Meetings last week in Geneva. You can read the text of a briefing we gave to media in Geneva here.

Our strategy for grappling with the backlog embraces the following worksharing concepts: 1) creating new efficiencies in the global patent system by leveraging the search and examination work products of other IP Offices and 2) providing the global patent community greater flexibility as to when patent applications may be examined and accelerated.

There are numerous worksharing and acceleration programs being hosted and proposed by various IP offices. In order to make it easier for our counterparts in global IP offices and our stakeholders to access information on these various programs and proposals, we have compiled two charts that outline our key worksharing and acceleration initiatives. We hope these charts provide a better understanding of the available and proposed programs. The first chart outlines the major worksharing initiatives at the USPTO and includes some information on programs administered by JPO and EPO. The second chart outlines all of our domestic acceleration programs and proposals and includes information as to when applicants may request expedited examination.

We have shared these charts with the other IP5 Offices (EPO, JPO, KIPO and SIPO). We believe these charts will be useful to the IP5 group as we all assess and evaluate our various programs. Moreover, we think our users will benefit by having access to a complete survey of all the programs available through the IP5 Offices.

I invite your comments and questions on these charts and on our worksharing and acceleration programs generally. I look forward to your feedback.

From Director Kappos' blog posting September 20, 2010:

It has been just over one year since I was sworn-in as Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and I’d like to use the opportunity to take stock of where we are, and also to let you know about things we are working on for the coming fiscal year to address our goals of reducing the backlog and improving quality.

But first, I want to take a moment to recognize the incredibly talented and dedicated workforce at the USPTO.  As a practitioner, I knew that the USPTO had a dedicated and caring team.  But now I can say with tremendous conviction and unique personal knowledge that the USPTO staff is truly remarkable for its knowledge, judgment, and execution -- just as hardworking, smart and passionate as any I have worked with in my career.  It is because of their hard work that I can reflect today on progress against our many objectives.

Last year, the USPTO had a backlog of more than 750,000 patent applications.  Today that number is closer to 725,000--pretty remarkable if you consider that filings are up four percent this year and the size of our workforce has decreased.  We set a goal of bringing the backlog below 700,000 by the end of this year and I am happy to report that we are within striking distance.  With the progress we're making, we are poised to see the first significant reduction in the backlog in a decade. 

I’d like to highlight some of the initiatives and programs implemented in the past year that have helped us begin chipping away at the patent backlog.  First, the USPTO, in partnership with our patent professional employee union (POPA), implemented a new production count system.  That is the tool we use to measure examiner performance and output. The new system provides more time for examination and more credit for first actions, and thereby encourages high quality examination early in prosecution.  As of August 31, 2010, the number of actions per disposal was down to approximately 2.4 from over 2.9 in FY 2008-2009.  This represents a substantial increase in efficiency.

We are also specifically encouraging the compact prosecution of patent applications.  Compact prosecution involves finding the core issues with patent applications and resolving them as early in the examination process as possible. One way to encourage this practice is to increase interviews between applicants and examiners.  Interviews have risen significantly in 2010, including as a result of our First Action Interview Pilot Program which allows participants to conduct an interview with the examiner after reviewing the results of a prior art search. 

We are also working to increase the size of our patent examining corps.  We’ve launched a targeted hiring program to focus on recruiting experienced former examiners and IP professionals who can get up to speed examining patent applications with a minimal amount of training time. 

While we’re improving the way we motivate and hire examiners, we’re working to reduce the impediments applicants and examiners face.  One way is through the review of the patent classification system – which is how we assign applications for examination, and is critical to effectively locating prior art.  Planning is underway for this project, which will roll out in FY 2011.

Another critical infrastructure project involves upgrading our information technology (IT) systems.  We have already started the process to move our Trademark IT infrastructure into a “cloud” computing environment which will improve the stability, availability, and performance of the systems that support trademark examination and public access to Trademark Office information.  On the Patents side, we’re building a new patent examination IT system from end to end.  This project involves the reengineering of the pre-exam, workflow, examination, and publication processes. 

Several applicant-driven patent examination acceleration programs were started this year.

1.  Green Technology Pilot Program:  This program to provide accelerated examination of patent applications for innovations related to environmentally friendly and energy conservation technologies started in December 2009.  As of August 31, 2010, 1,477 Green Technology petitions have been received into our Green Tech Pilot Program.  This number represents very strong applicant uptake – nearly 50 percent of the upper limit originally set for the program.   We anticipate further expansion of this program in the coming months.

2.  Project Exchange:  This pilot program gives applicants with multiple filings greater control over the priority in which their applications are examined, by providing incentives for applicants to withdraw unexamined applications that are no longer important to them—and by the way, it helps to reduce our backlog.  We piloted this program first for small entities only, and only recently expended it to all applicants.  So the numbers are small, but they are starting to pick up and hopefully will accelerate further in the coming months.

3.  Three-Track Examination:  Just recently, we proposed a new patent examination initiative that would provide applicants greater control over the speed with which their applications are examined.  Under the proposed “Three-Track” initiative, an applicant may request Track I (prioritized examination for an additional fee),  Track II (traditional examination under the current procedures), or Track III (applicant-controlled delay for up to 30 months).  We have received many public comments about this proposal, particularly with regard to Track III, and are taking them into consideration as we refine the proposal for implementation.  We expect to proceed with it in the coming year.

Turning to the important work being done by our policy and international teams, it has been a busy year.  Worksharing is an important tool for speeding the processing of patent applications filed in multiple jurisdictions and we’re focused on expanding and improving our worksharing practices. The USPTO has implemented the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) with other major patent offices worldwide and we’ve set the goal of doubling PPH cases year over year for the next three years.  We’re aiming for:  4,000 cases this year; 8,000 cases next year; and 12,000 cases in 2012.  I’m pleased to report that we expect to reach the 4000 case goal this year, meaning that in one year we will have more than doubled the throughput of all PPH efforts over all previous years combined.

Finally, I’d like to discuss our increased emphasis on expanding the communications capabilities of the agency and increasing transparency.  In the past year we have significantly expanded the amount of information we are making available to the public.  We have also launched a number of communications tools to facilitate dialogue between USPTO management, employees, and the stakeholder community at large.  These include:

·   Blogs:  In addition to this employee blog, I am blogging weekly on the “Directors Forum” blog which can be accessed on our Web site, www.uspto.gov, and we’ve just begun sending the Director’s blog out via Google Feedburner so anyone can subscribe.

·   Feedback Channels:  We’ve implemented “Feedback Channels” to solicit public input on initiatives like the Green Tech and Three Track program and we’ve received a lot of helpful feedback. 

·   Facebook:  We’ve established a Facebook page to engage the public and the intellectual property community directly and provide real-time information.

·   Patents Dashboard:  This month we launched our new online “dashboard” to communicate Agency data and performance metrics on patent pendency and other key patents measurements in a clear and understandable way—and in real time.   If you haven’t had the opportunity to do so, please take a look at the new dashboard on our Web site. 

It has been a busy year here at the USPTO and the new year will be just as busy.  The entire team at USPTO is committed to implementing improvements across the board to give America’s inventors the opportunity to thrive in a global economy.   Thanks to the hard work of our employees and the support of our stakeholders, we are making solid headway.

From David Kappos' USPTO Blog, Sept. 7, 2010:

As you all know, reducing the backlog of unexamined patent applications and driving patent pendency down is our top priority.  This goal is especially urgent at a time when our economy is struggling, and the patent backlog is stalling the delivery of innovative goods and services to market while hindering economic growth and job creation.  It has been estimated that the current backlog of more than 700,000 applications may cost the U.S. economy billions of dollars due to what is called “foregone innovation”— commercial opportunities that fail to get off the ground because of long delays in obtaining necessary patent protection.  That is unacceptable and we are determined to turn things around because so much depends on it.

An important part of the effort to reduce pendency is better understanding the numerous factors that contribute to examination delays and measuring their impact in a way that makes the USPTO more transparent to the public.  By looking at the whole picture, we can more effectively develop ways to increase the efficiency of the examination process.  While we know we have to hire more examiners to reduce the backlog, we also know that we must re-engineer the way we do business at the USPTO and have already implemented a series of initiatives designed to improve efficiencies.  These process changes will empower our workforce to be more effective and have already begun to yield important gains.

Traditionally, we have measured pendency at two points in the process:  first, we have measured the average time from filing to First Office Action, which is the first substantive examination action; and we have measured the average time from filing to allowance or abandonment of the application, which we refer to on the dashboard as Traditional Total Pendency.  We will continue to maintain these measures as they are helpful ways to look at pendency, and indeed sometimes the best measure for applications that proceed through the system without the need for appeals or divisional practice or continuation practice.  These traditional measures will also be maintained because they provide a consistent benchmark against which to measure our progress, and enable us to maintain consistency in our reporting to the Department of Commerce, the Office of Management and Budget, the Congress and the public.  However, as I have previously stated, these measures do not provide complete data about pendency across the USPTO.  We therefore will now measure pendency in several additional ways to ensure we have a more complete picture, and will make that data available to the public starting today. 

We have just launched the beta version of a USPTO Data Visualization Center on our Web site that introduces the patents dashboard.  This tool will give the public access to traditional measures of pendency as well as several new pendency tracking measures.  We are also providing other important data covering USPTO patent operations in a convenient dashboard format.  The patents dashboard provides more refined pendency information than was previously available, as well as other critical performance indicators such as the number of applications in the backlog, production, actions per disposal and our staffing levels.  This information will help the entire IP community to better understand our processes, and enable applicants to make more informed decisions about their applications, especially as we develop more opportunities for applicants to control the timing at which their applications are examined.  The new dashboard, which will be updated monthly, will also be used internally by the USPTO to analyze and improve our examination process and to track the effectiveness of our improvement efforts.  We intend to further refine the dashboard and welcome your input about ways we can improve it.  A dedicated mailbox has been set up for your comments and we intend to monitor your feedback carefully.  

The dashboard introduces six new measures of pendency designed to give a better overall picture of the contributions of different parts of the examination process to application pendency.  For example, the traditional total pendency measure stops the clock with the filing of an RCE, which may not provide an accurate measure of the total time it takes to complete the examination of an application through request for continued examination (RCE) practice.  A new measure, called “Traditional Total Pendency Including RCEs,” looks at pendency of applications from filing of the original application to ultimate disposal of that same application, including any additional time attributable to RCE filings in those applications where RCE filings are made.  Similar measures are provided relative to divisional applications and other types of continuation practice.  We also provide information about pendency for applications in appeal practice.

You can learn more about what we will be measuring and tracking on the dashboard at www.uspto.gov/dashboards.  For those who really want to dive into the numbers, we will also make a more detailed spreadsheet available for each measure with additional data.  We encourage you to watch our progress as the programs and initiatives we’ve started over the past year begin to show results.  For instance, you’ll see that the number of actions per disposal is dropping, indicating improved examination efficiency.  With the recent legislation giving us access to an additional $129 million of our collections, our ability to increase examiner overtime and accelerate information technology improvements and hiring will lead to even more progress in reducing application pendency and the backlog of unexamined applications.

We're pleased to offer a useful new tool for our stakeholders, and a window into our operations that has not been available before.  We hope you find the car dashboard metaphor helpful and attractive.  While we recognize that data visualization experts may prefer other formats, the dashboard metaphor conveys information succinctly, and gives us all something to start with.  However we appreciate that all metaphors have their limits -- for instance the speedometer format is certainly not intended to convey that a higher backlog is better.  

We hope you’ll find the new USPTO Data Visualization Center and dashboard to be a valuable resource and we welcome any feedback you have on how we can make it even better -- even as to the metaphor used to visualize the data we are presenting.

We look forward to your feedback.

Today I'm happy to report that something really important and positive happened last week; something that should brighten the perspective of everyone who cares about innovation, intellectual property, and the operations of the USPTO.  Both houses of Congress made strong supportive statements about IP and passed legislation, with laser-focus and laser-speed.  Last Thursday the Senate passed H.R. 5874, which had been both introduced and passed just one day earlier by the House.  This single-purpose legislation increases the Fiscal Year 2010 spending authority for the USPTO by $129 million, and we expect the President to sign the bill into law shortly.  This swift action reflects the recognition on the part of the Administration and the Congress of the vital role our Agency plays in supporting innovation and in spurring job creation and economic growth.  

This legislation will allow the USPTO to immediately take a number of actions that will benefit the entire IP community, including:  hiring additional patent examiners; funding full overtime for patent examiners and support staff; accelerating patent examination process reengineering; and continuing to fully fund PCT contract work.  Mission-critical IT projects to increase the effectiveness of every USPTO function will also be accelerated.

This is unquestionably a important step in the right direction, returning to the USPTO most of the $200M we expect to collect this fiscal year in excess of the amount originally appropriated to us.  And even more importantly, it is a move toward unleashing America’s innovative genius as well as the efforts of our nation’s innovation agency – the USPTO.   Without question, there is widespread understanding that we need full access to all our fee revenues, given the enormous requirements associated with our efforts to effectively address our pendency and backlog challenges.

The passage of this bill would not have happened without the leadership of Congress, as well as the dedication and support of the President, the Department of Commerce, Office of Management and Budget, and the IP Community.  On behalf of the USPTO, thank you to everyone who played a role in making this possible.

From Director Kappos on July 8:

I’m writing today about a major challenge and opportunity for the USPTO—and for the entire IP community.     

In the coming days we will be releasing, for employee and public comment, the Draft 2010-2015 USPTO Strategic Plan.

Today, I’m asking the entire IP community to invest in the formulation of this plan. 

The draft plan sets out the USPTO’s mission-focused strategic goals:  optimize patent quality and timeliness; optimize trademark quality and timeliness; and provide global and domestic leadership to improve IP policy, protection, and enforcement worldwide.

The plan identifies the objectives we believe are necessary to achieve the strategic goals and sets out the projects, initiatives, and programs we’ll use to get there.

The objectives are:

1.  
   1. Provide timely examination of patent applications.  Reduce the time to first office action on the merits for patent applications to 10 months, and average total pendency to 20 months 
   2. Improve quality of patent and trademark examination
   3. Improve/enhance patent appeal and post-grant processes
   4. Optimize trademark quality and maintain pendency
   5. Demonstrate global leadership in all aspects of IP policy development
   6. Improve IT infrastructure and tools
   7. Implement a sustainable funding model for operations 
   8. Improve relations with employees and stakeholders      

In the weeks, months, and years to come, we’re counting on USPTO employees and the IP community to unite around the strategic plan.  We all need to believe in this plan in order to properly execute it.  That’s why I want the plan to reflect the values and knowledge of the entire IP community—that includes the ideas of our employees, public stakeholders, and USPTO management. 

We invite your comments, your questions, and your suggestions for improvement to help us refine our Strategic Plan.    

Our success will ensure that the USPTO and the American IP system continue to fuel the U.S. economy and job growth by spurring innovation, creativity and ingenuity.

Please stay tuned for the release of the draft plan in the coming days.  We look forward to your feedback on it.

From Director Kappos' post on June 15:

Today, I’d like to share some perspectives on the USPTO’s “Three-Track” proposal for patent examination, which was released for public comment earlier this month.  This proposed examination initiative would allow inventors to choose among three different tracks of patent examination and thereby tailor the patent examination process to better suit their business needs.   We are currently seeking public comment on this proposal and will hold a public meeting on July 20^th.

The Three–Track proposal is designed, first and foremost, to help us put Americans to work – that is, to enable applicants to increase their own, and the USPTO’s effectiveness by selecting their most time-critical work for priority processing.  It is also intended to help reduce pendency and enhance work sharing among IP offices. 

Track 1 of the program is prioritized examination aimed at achieving final action within 12 months of the request for prioritized examination and the payment of an accompanying fee.   Track 2 would be today’s examination process, which currently takes on average 34 months to complete.  Track 3 would allow non-continuing applications first filed at the USPTO up to 30 months to decide whether to request examination.  In addition, the proposal would allow applicants to “change tracks” if circumstances warrant it-- either speeding up or slowing down the patent examination process as needed. 

The proposal would enhance worksharing by synchronizing USPTO examination of applicants first filed overseas to follow overseas examination—thereby ensuring the overseas patent office work product is available to the USPTO examiner when she undertakes her work.  Specifically, it would require applicants in any application that claims the priority date benefit of a foreign application to submit a copy of the search report, if any, and the first action on the merits from the foreign office together with arguments explaining why the claims in the U.S. application are patentable in the U.S. given the positions taken by the foreign office. 

An inventor who files first in the United States -- or an inventor who files first in a foreign office and receives a first action on the merits that is in turn submitted along with applicable comments to demonstrate how the claims in the U.S. application are patentable -- may request prioritized examination under Track 1 after paying the relevant fee.   Thus, both applicants who file first in USPTO and applicants who file overseas first can obtain the benefit of accelerated processing at the USPTO.   Track 3 is available to an inventor who files first in the United States provided the applicant does not request non-publication.    

The Three-Track proposal is a win-win for inventors, the Agency and the public.  Patent applicants are allowed to either accelerate or delay patent processing according to their needs or market conditions.  Inventors can opt for Track 1 for inventions that are ready for immediate commercialization.  Or, by taking advantage of Track 3 examination, both small and large entities are able to delay the cost of obtaining a patent until their invention is ready for commercialization and they determine that further investment in the patent process makes sense.

The Agency benefits from the ability to focus resources more effectively on the most important work of the applicant community.  In addition, we expect this will help with the backlog generally, as some percentage of Track 3 applications will be dropped without payment of the search and examination fees. In a turn on an old adage, a sinking tide lowers all boats – in this case, in a good way.

The public would also benefit by the Agency prioritizing its resources toward applications likely to be used in the market much more quickly than is possible under the current process.  By examining the most promising inventions promptly, the USPTO will facilitate investment in commercializing innovation and the creation of new jobs.

One issue left open by the Three-Track proposal is setting of fees for Track 1, especially for small and micro entities.  Unfortunately, the USPTO does not have statutory authority to discount the Track 1 filing fee for small or micro entities.   If such enhanced authority were provided by Congress, we would grant a 50% discount for small entities and a 75% discount for micro-entities. Within the limits of the authority we have at the USPTO to help improve the patent process for our applicant community, we have designed the Three-Track proposal to help all patent filers – small and large.

I am very excited about the many benefits we can derive from a three-track examination process, and look forward to receiving comments from our employees, the IP community and the public. 

From David Kappos' blog on USPTO.gov:

A few weeks ago, IPLaw 360 published an article titled, “Five Things Patent Examiners Wish You Would Do.”  The article—aimed at patent practitioners—featured sound suggestions on things attorneys could do to help the examination process advance successfully.  SPEs David Ometz, John Cottingham and Andrew Koenig, who were interviewed for the article, were spot on in their suggestions for examiners and attorneys to find common ground and work together so deserving applicants can get their patents and their innovations to market. 

Here are their five tips:

1.      Set up an interview

As I’ve said in this blog and in other fora, I’m a big believer in the power of interviews.  When people talk to one another and listen to one another they can quickly understand points of agreement as well as differences, and resolve those differences in real time.

David Ometz put it perfectly: “An interview may not always result in the allowance of a case, but it can advance the prosecution, especially if it stalls out,” he said. “An examiner gets to hear firsthand from the attorney or applicant what the crux of the invention is, and that can help an examiner visualize the invention better in his head.”

Or, as John Cottingham said, “Communication allows for a better understanding on both sides and gets cases to move quickly.”

2.      Lay Out Arguments From the Get-Go

Attorneys should be precise in their arguments, pointing out in a concise manner just how the invention is novel and how it is different from prior art. And they should do this at the outset, rather than waiting until after one or more office actions, or on appeal.

In the article, Andrew Koenig said, “I've seen multiple times during prosecution that it is not until the appeal brief that attorneys give me all of their arguments. But if they had showed me those earlier, we might have had a different result.”

Getting precise information about the invention to the examiner early in the process can help advance prosecution and avoid unnecessary back and forth between the examiner and the applicant.

3.      Avoid Filing Excessive Claims

Excessive claims in a patent application can unnecessarily prolong prosecution.

David Ometz rightly pointed out: “Often the claims seem to be repetitive and they are trying to get at the same inventive concept. If an application goes above 30 or 40 claims, an attorney should consider what is in there that may be extra and what each claim is adding to the patent application.”

This is clearly a scenario where more isn’t necessarily better.  In fact, it's frequently worse.  Applicants should consider whether claims beyond 30 or so are really necessary.  In most cases, they probably are not.

4.      Put It in English, Please

Often applications from foreign filers are poorly translated into English, which can frustrate examiners and unnecessarily delay prosecution.

When an application is poorly translated and not in plain English, David Ometz noted: “It can be hard to understand what the invention is, and it could take an office action or two to sort through the claims to get at what they really mean.”

5.      Come Prepared

This sounds simple enough, but sometimes attorneys come to an interview without the information or knowledge needed to have a productive discussion.  Sometimes they seem not to know the case or are unable to articulate the inventive concept.

Andrew Koenig further explained that attorneys who are organized and well-prepared can help move the examination process forward and give examiners the information they need to do their jobs most effectively.  He added: “At the end of the day, it's about helping the applicant and the examiner get on the same page.”

Of course, we all know that patent quality, and timely completion of the examinaton process, is a two way street -- a shared responsibility between the USPTO and patent applicants.  We have lots of challenges on the USPTO side, and we're all working hard to overcome them.  By the same token, these five tips are great best practices to help applicants do their part.  The tips are all great, and I’m sure there are others you as applicants can share.  It would be great to assemble at least five more, so that we can put out a "Top 10" list.  What suggestions would you offer to other practitioners to help their chances of getting a patent?

From David Kappos' blog on May 12, 2010:

By now you’ve no doubt heard about the Agency’s “Ombudsman Program” which was announced in early April. 

One of the Agency’s strategic priorities is to improve relations with our stakeholders. The newly initiated Ombudsman Pilot Program has been established to assist in meeting that priority.

At times, when I am speaking with patent practitioners and applicants, they share their frustrations with the patent process. Examples include cases where the examination process has stalled or where applicants are unsure of the appropriate person to contact for assistance. At other times an applicant or attorney may simply need assistance getting connected with the USPTO employee who can assist them with a particular issue.

To put it another way, applicants have asked for a pressure relief valve, and we have implemented it.

To help with the above, and many other issues that may occur during the patent process, the Agency has implemented the Patents Ombudsman Pilot Program. The Program is running across all of our Technology Centers, using TC ombudsman representatives who are Supervisory Patent Examiners (SPEs) and Quality Assurance Specialists (QASs) prepared to field questions and concerns from the public and work with the appropriate PTO employees (SPEs, Directors, Petitions contacts, etc.) to facilitate responses. The ombudsman representative will help ensure that the applicant's issues are addressed quickly – usually within five business days. The ombudsman representative will also ensure confidentiality when requested by the applicant or applicant's representative. 

I look forward to our new Ombudsman Program strengthening the USPTO’s ability to provide our stakeholders with the most efficient and precise service possible. Please give it a try in cases where a pressure relief valve is needed.  More information about the Ombudsman Program can be found on our Web site. I look forward to your feedback on the Program.

Here is Director Kappos' posting from April 28:

In early February I asked for reader ideas about how we might reengineer the MPEP, and I was pleased to see how many thoughtful suggestions you all made.  With this post I want to let you know that your ideas have been heard, and we are acting on them. 

Many people suggested that additional information be provided alongside the current content, including:

·         Examples of cases showing both sides of a rule

·         Examples of reasons to combine that are sufficient to support obviousness

·         Examples with case citations including active links to decisions

·         Guidelines for when requirements are satisfied

·         Definitions

People also suggested that we re-organize content to reduce redundancy, provide links from sections to other related sections, and provide better indexing and search tools.

In terms of wikis and online collaboration with the public, there was broad consensus that the USPTO should be the keeper of the official version of the text, but that it would be useful to have outside contributions to the content, in several different forms.  These included:

·     Encouraging readers to post comments about the current text, on a section-by-section basis, to point out errors, make clarifications, and add examples of interpretations and links to case law and other materials.

·     Posting preliminary content and then encouraging the community to comment on this new content before it becomes official.  This might include a wiki section for adding additional content.

·     Periodically summarizing and following up on the comments on each section, both to ensure those with merit are acted upon, and to keep the comments on each section from becoming too cluttered.

·     Providing a way for the community to discuss and debate topics such as how to interpret recent court decisions.

We are now fully engaged in converting the contents of the MPEP into a more modern set of tools and are looking at collaboration tools to support the suggestions we have received.  Watch this space for further developments. Thank you again for your input, and keep it coming!

It was just a spectacular time to be in Washington D.C. last week. The weather was as good as it gets and the cherry blossoms were in full flower. It all made for a perfect setting for the annual induction ceremony of the National Inventors Hall of Fame. I had the great pleasure of participating in the ceremony, which was held at the Department of Commerce auditorium. It was the first time the event had been held in Washington since 1988.

The USPTO co-founded the Hall of Fame in 1973 and has always supported its noble mission of paying homage to the innovative giants of our time. And what a class of inductees we had this year. Collectively, they have amassed 387 patents. Their innovations have saved millions of lives, improved the quality of life for countless others and transformed the way just about everyone on the planet communicates, navigates and entertains themselves.

They join the 421 inductees who are enshrined at the National Inventors Hall of Fame and Museum on the USPTO campus. If you haven't had a chance to visit the Hall of Fame and Museum, I hope you will do so soon. There you will be able to grasp the immense contributions that these women and men have made to society. The technologies they have created are a road map through the progress of the modern world, a patent-by-patent history of the evolution of technology.

Shortly after becoming Director of the USPTO last August, I visited the Hall of Fame.  It was, even for someone like me who has spent my entire adult life working with inventors, an inspiring experience. But I took something even more important away from that visit--a renewed commitment to the cause of reforming and transforming the USPTO and creating a more modern patent system that better serves America's innovative genius. I can think of no better way for all of us at the USPTO to honor and thank these amazing people than to pledge ourselves to achieving that goal.

As always I look forward to your comments and suggestions.

This Group will include copies of postings from Director David Kappos' public blog posted at www.uspto.gov/blog/, and discussions related to the Director's postings.