1

TC1600-Quality Assurance

Bennett Celsa QASJoseph Woitach SPE

June 4, 2013

Overview

Two Parts:

i. New Corps Wide Quality Metrics (effective FY 2012) ;

ii. TC 1600 Implementation: Quality Plan (FY 2012-2013).

2

Corps Wide Quality Metrics

• USPTO and Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) 2011 Initiative.

• Sources: current practices, key USPTO statistics, blogs, PPAC outreach, applicant and practitioner surveys, foreign offices, past USPTO studies, non-USPTO studies, and public comments (e.g. roundtables).• new Composite Quality Metric : effective FY

2012.

• http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/patentquality.jsp (main web site); http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/qual_comp_metric.pdf.

3

Seven Corps Wide Quality Metrics

• These metrics, combine to present a balanced view of quality issues at the USPTO:

4

1st Four Corps-Wide Quality Metrics

• First Four Metrics :

• Final Disposition Compliance Rate;• In-Process Compliance Rate;• First Action on the Merits Search Review;• Complete First Action on the Merits Review;

are based upon data from reviews of specific applications; and are measured by the Office of Patent Quality Assurance (OPQA) at the USPTO.

5

6th/7th Metrics (Surveys)

• The last two metrics (External/Internal Surveys)

• External Quality Survey (applicant/practitioner experiences); and

• Internal Quality Survey (examiner experiences)

are formed from surveys performed by an independent party.

supplemented by TC specific information obtained from Ombudsman program, Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership (BCP) Meetings, Art Unit meetings etc.  

6

5th Corps Wide Metric (QIR)

• The fifth metric (QIR) relies upon objective statistical data taken from the USPTO PALM (Palm Application Locating and Monitoring system) database.

• The QIR averages five factors, which are based on:• Actions per Disposal • RCEs of Total Disposals • Re-openings After-final • Non-FAOM Non-final Actions • Restrictions After-first Action

• Analysis of PALM data for these five factors can reveal the presence of statistical trends arising during examination where:• training is needed; and • the presence of outstanding quality procedures identified and

encouraged.

7

Goal of QIR Initiatives

• USPTO’s on-going efforts toward

• compact prosecution and

• pendency reduction.

8

QIR#2 RCE-Pilot Initiatives (Corps)

• Decrease RCEs of Total Disposals: i. After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (AFCP 2.0): authorizes non-

production time for examiners to consider responses filed after a final rejection;

until September 30, 2013.• http://ptoweb.uspto.gov/patents/afcp/ • http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-05-17/pdf/2013-11870.pdf. 

ii. Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement (QPIDS): eliminates the requirement for processing of a request for continued examination (RCE) with an information disclosure statement (IDS) filed after payment of the issue fee in order for the IDS to be considered by the examiner;

•   if the examiner determines that no item of information in the IDS necessitates reopening prosecution, the USPTO will issue a corrected notice of allowability;

until September 30, 2013.• http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/qpids.jsp

9

QIR#2 RCE Initiatives (USPTO/Public)

• RCE Outreach Program: http://ptoweb.uspto.gov/ptointranet/index.htm • USPTO/Patent Public Advisory Committee

(PPAC) collaboration;• Purpose: i. to learn more about the root causes for RCE

filings and related pressure points experienced by our stakeholder community; and

ii.enable applicants to use RCE practice when needed and avoid it when equal or better options may be available.

10

TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Strategy)

• FY 2012 Quality Plan Strategy: addressed 5 QIR factors, based on:1. Actions per Disposal;2. RCEs of Total Disposals; 3. Re-openings After-final; 4. Non-FAOM Non-final Actions; and 5. Restrictions After-first Action

• Course of Action: formed Teams (SPE’s and QAS’s):1. “Communication Team”; and2. “QIR Factor Teams”.

Mined QIR data for each of the above Factors to determine trends useful for developing training on enhanced efficiencies (quality) and best practices.

11

TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Course of Action)

TC1600 Quality Plan- Course of Action:

i. Communication Team: Educational: • formed first to introduce QIR factors to TC1600;

ii. QIR Teams: Practical:• addressed the individual QIR components;• identified three main areas needing improvement:

• actions/disposal (QIR 1),

• disposals not RCE (QIR 2), restrictions after first action (QIR 5): FY12 focus

12

TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Implementation)

TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan: Implementation: •Communication team (4 SPE’s): TC 1600 Awareness:• May FY12: SPE introduction

• QIR introduction and restriction strategy to SPE’s via management meeting;

• June FY12: Examiner introduction: • SPE’s communicate QIR information and restriction strategy

to examiners at Art Unit meetings.

13

TC 1600: FY 2012-13 Quality Plan:

Implementation: Restriction (QIR #5)

• Restriction Team- FY12 Focused Targeted Metric: • identified examiners with excessive numbers of

such restrictions, and reviewed selected cases;• training and quality plans were formulated for

examiners including emphasis on telephonic election.

% of Total Restrictions Not Made on 2nd or Subsequent Action:

Improved: 94.8% (EOY11) to 96.1%(EOY12) to 97.7% (FY13 midyr). --(This continued a positive trend that was realized following earlier compact prosecution efforts).

14

TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: Implementation

• Established the basis for our FY 13 main focus:

QIR #1: actions/disposal and

QIR #2: RCEs of total disposals.

15

TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#1(actions/disposal)

QIR #1 (actions/disposal):• Examiners with above average

actions/disposal were identified and information communicated to SPEs;

• Workgroup Manager/Examiner informational and training sessions have been held;

% Employees Averaging <3 Actions per Disposal:

Improved from 70.6% (EOY12) to 75.4% (FY 13 midyr).

16

TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#2 (RCEs)

QIR #2: RCE filings • Interviews after final and during prosecution have been

encouraged;• Patterns in repeated filings of RCEs are being

investigated; • Examiners with a disproportionate number of disposals

for RCE are being identified and docket management issues addressed.

% Disposals Not RCE: Decreased slightly:76.8% (EOY12) to 76.5% (FY13 midyr).  

17

TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#3 (AF Re-openings)

QIR #3: AF Re-Openings; • Art Unit Meetings: QIR awareness and Mentoring;• After-Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/afcp.jsp ;

• part of the USPTO’s on-going efforts towards compact prosecution and increased collaboration between examiners and stakeholders;

• AFCP authorizes extra time for examiners to consider responses filed after a final rejection.

% Finals Not Reopened: Improved: 97.5%(EOY12) to 98.2% (FY13 midyr).

ns

18

TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#4 (multiple non-finals)

QIR #4: Non-FAOM Non-final Actions:• Art Unit Meetings: QIR awareness and Mentoring;• Compact Prosecution Training:

i. Workshops:• Applicant’s Reply Workshop (FY 12);• Enhancing Efficiency in Examination (FY13)ii. Refresher Training.

% Total Actions: Not 2nd+ Non-Finals Improved:97.1% (EOY12) to 97.6%(FY13 midyr).

19

20

Questions

• Bennett Celsa (Quality Assurance Specialist) Bennett.celsa@uspto.gov

(571) 272-0807

• Joseph Woitach (Supervisory Patent Examiner) Joseph.woitach@uspto.gov

(571) 272-0739

Technology Center 1600 USPTO