an overview of u.s. patent operations · 12/5/2011 · 6 interview time fy 2008 – fy 2012...
Post on 16-Aug-2020
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
An Overview of U.S. Patent Operations
David J. Kappos Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
2
Applications Awaiting First Action FY 2009 – FY 2012 (through November)
610,000620,000630,000640,000650,000660,000670,000680,000690,000700,000710,000720,000730,000740,000750,000760,000770,000
Appl
icat
ions
Aw
aitin
g Fi
rst A
ctio
n
Backlog
Preliminary FY 2012 Target:
624,700
668,466 as of November 30th.
3
0
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
175,000
200,000
225,000
250,000
275,000
300,000
325,000
350,000
375,000
400,000
425,000
450,000
475,000
500,000
525,000
550,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Appl
icat
ions
Fiscal Year
Total UPR and RCE Filings FY 2001 – FY 2012 (projections)
Preliminary FY 2012 Target:
533,300
FY 12 data are projections.
4
RCE Backlog FY 2010 – FY 2012 (through November)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
RC
E A
pplic
atio
ns A
wai
ting
Nex
t Ac
tion
RCE Backlog
RCE Backlog 75,529 as of November 30th.
5
First Action Pendency and Total Pendency FY 2009 – FY 2012 (through November)
10.012.014.016.018.020.022.024.026.028.030.032.034.036.038.040.0
10/0
8
11/0
8
12/0
8
01/0
9
02/0
9
03/0
9
04/0
9
05/0
9
06/0
9
07/0
9
08/0
9
09/0
9
10/0
9
11/0
9
12/0
9
01/1
0
02/1
0
03/1
0
04/1
0
05/1
0
06/1
0
07/1
0
08/1
0
09/1
0
10/1
0
11/1
0
12/1
0
01/1
1
02/1
1
03/1
1
04/1
1
05/1
1
06/1
1
07/1
1
08/1
1
09/1
1
10/1
1
11/1
1
Mon
ths
First Action Pendency Total Pendency
Preliminary FY 2012 First action Target:
22.5 Months
Preliminary FY 2012 Total Pendency Target:
34.7 Months
6
Interview Time FY 2008 – FY 2012 (through November)
21,273 hours as of November 2011, compared with 20,177 hours in November 2010.
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
110,000
120,000
130,000
140,000
150,000
160,000
170,000
October November December January February March April May June July August September
Ho
urs
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000
10,00011,00012,00013,00014,00015,00016,00017,00018,00019,00020,00021,00022,00023,00024,00025,000
13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59
Num
ber o
f App
licat
ions
Months
Distribution of Corps Backlog (Tail)
Tail Cases Remaining Tail Cases Worked
7
Clearing the Oldest Patent Applications 2.0 (COPA 2.0) FY 2012 (through November 5th, 2011)
FY 2012 COPA Backlog (Tail): Applications with filing dates on or before September 1st, 2010 (304,000 on Oct. 1, 2011) FY 2012 Goal: Reduce COPA Backlog (Tail) by 260,000 applications
277,108 Total Tail Cases Remaining
FY2012 Goal: 260,000 Cases
26,892 Tail Cases Worked
233,108 Tail Cases Needed for Goal
Clearing the Oldest Patent Applications 2.0 (COPA) FY 2012 (through 11/5/11)
8
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
22.0
24.0
26.0
28.0
30.0
32.0
10/0
811
/08
12/0
801
/09
02/0
903
/09
04/0
905
/09
06/0
907
/09
08/0
909
/09
10/0
911
/09
12/0
901
/10
02/1
003
/10
04/1
005
/10
06/1
007
/10
08/1
009
/10
10/1
011
/10
12/1
001
/11
02/1
103
/11
04/1
105
/11
06/1
107
/11
08/1
109
/11
10/1
111
/11
Mon
ths
Forward Looking First Action Pendency FY 2009 – FY 2012 (through November)
Forward Looking Pendency represents an estimate of the average number of months it would take to complete a first Office action under current and projected workload and resource levels for an application filed at the given date.
9
Actions Per Disposal Target
Sustained decrease in actions per disposal is a positive indicator – issues are being resolved efficiently.
12 Month Rolling Average Actions Per Disposal, by Bi-Week FY 2009 – FY 2011 (through pay period 1120)
12 Month Rolling Average Actions Per Disposal, by Bi-Week FY 2009 – FY 2012 (through November)
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.0
10/1
1/20
08
11/8
/200
8
12/6
/200
8
1/3/
2009
1/31
/200
9
2/28
/200
9
3/28
/200
9
4/25
/200
9
5/23
/200
9
6/20
/200
9
7/18
/200
9
8/15
/200
9
9/12
/200
9
10/1
0/20
09
11/7
/200
9
12/5
/200
9
1/2/
2010
1/30
/201
0
2/27
/201
0
3/27
/201
0
4/24
/201
0
5/22
/201
0
6/19
/201
0
7/17
/201
0
8/14
/201
0
9/11
/201
0
10/9
/201
0
11/6
/201
0
12/4
/201
0
1/1/
2011
1/29
/201
1
2/26
/201
1
3/26
/201
1
4/23
/201
1
5/21
/201
1
6/18
/201
1
7/16
/201
1
8/13
/201
1
9/10
/201
1
10/8
/201
1
11/5
/201
1
10
12 Month Rolling Average Allowance Rate, by Bi-Week FY 2009 – FY 2011 (through pay period 1120)
Sustained increase in allowance rate is a positive indicator – it shows increased efficiency of the workforce.
12 Month Rolling Average Allowance Rate, by Bi-Week FY 2009 – FY 2012 (November)
40.0%
41.0%
42.0%
43.0%
44.0%
45.0%
46.0%
47.0%
48.0%
49.0%
50.0%
10/1
1/20
0810
/25/
2008
11/8
/200
811
/22/
2008
12/6
/200
812
/20/
2008
1/3/
2009
1/17
/200
91/
31/2
009
2/14
/200
92/
28/2
009
3/14
/200
93/
28/2
009
4/11
/200
94/
25/2
009
5/9/
2009
5/23
/200
96/
6/20
096/
20/2
009
7/4/
2009
7/18
/200
98/
1/20
098/
15/2
009
8/29
/200
99/
12/2
009
9/30
/200
910
/10/
2009
10/2
4/20
0911
/7/2
009
11/2
1/20
0912
/5/2
009
12/1
9/20
091/
2/20
101/
16/2
010
1/30
/201
02/
13/2
010
2/27
/201
03/
13/2
010
3/27
/201
04/
10/2
010
4/24
/201
05/
8/20
105/
22/2
010
6/5/
2010
6/19
/201
07/
3/20
107/
17/2
010
7/31
/201
08/
14/2
010
8/28
/201
09/
11/2
010
9/30
/201
010
/9/2
010
10/2
3/20
1011
/6/2
010
11/2
0/20
1012
/4/2
010
12/1
8/20
101/
1/20
111/
15/2
011
1/29
/201
12/
12/2
011
2/26
/201
13/
12/2
011
3/26
/201
14/
9/20
114/
23/2
011
5/7/
2011
5/21
/201
16/
4/20
116/
18/2
011
7/2/
2011
0716
/11
7/30
/201
18/
13/2
011
8/27
/201
19/
10/2
011
9/30
/201
110
/8/2
011
10/2
2/20
1111
/5/2
011
11/1
9/20
11
Allowance Rate
11
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 10/11 11/11
Perc
ent
Fiscal Year
UPR Attrition Rate Less Transfers and Retirees
UPR Examiner Attrition Rate Less Transfers and Retirees
FY 2001 – FY 2012 (November)
83.084.085.086.087.088.089.090.091.092.093.094.095.096.097.098.099.0
100.0
09/0
512
/05
03/0
606
/06
09/0
612
/06
03/0
706
/07
09/0
712
/07
03/0
806
/08
09/0
812
/08
03/0
906
/09
09/0
912
/09
02/1
003
/10
04/1
005
/10
06/1
007
/10
08/1
009
/10
10/1
011
/10
12/1
001
/11
02/1
103
/11
04/1
105
/11
06/1
107
/11
08/1
109
/11
10/1
111
/11
Perc
ent
Final Disposition Compliance Rate In-Process Compliance Rate
Quality Measures 12 Month Rolling Average
FY 2005 – FY 2012 (through November)
2012 Final Disposition Compliance Rate Target Range
(95.6% - 96.7%)
2012 In-Process Compliance Rate Target Range
(94.6% - 96.0%) 12
Actual as of November 2011: 95.5% Actual as of November 2011: 95.3%
Quality Measures
13
Final Disposition Compliance Rate
In-Process Compliance Rate
Pre-FAOM Search Review
Complete FAOM Review
Quality Index Reporting
External Quality Survey
Internal Quality Survey
Quality Composite Score
FY12-Nov 95.5% 95.3% 95.1% 90.8% 89.4% N/A N/A N/AFY11Q4 95.4% 95.2% 94.6% 90.9% 89.5% 3.0 4.3 30.7FY11Q3 95.4% 94.7% 93.4% 90.0% 89.1% 2.7 4.2 26.4FY11Q2 95.3% 94.8% 90.8% 89.7% 88.9% 2.7 4.2 25.5FY11Q1 96.2% 94.9% N/A N/A 88.9% 3.6 N/A N/AFY10Q4 96.3% 94.9% N/A N/A 89.3% 3.6 N/A N/AFY10Q3 96.0% 94.6% N/A N/A 89.5% 1.8 N/A N/AFY10Q2 95.7% 94.4% N/A N/A 89.1% 1.8 N/A N/AFY10Q1 94.5% 94.1% N/A N/A 87.9% 1.2 N/A N/AFY09Q4 94.4% 93.6% N/A N/A 85.9% 1.2 N/A N/AFY09Q3 94.1% 94.1% N/A N/A 84.2% 1.1 N/A N/AFY09Q2 93.8% 93.9% N/A N/A 83.4% 1.1 N/A N/AFY09Q1 94.0% 93.4% N/A N/A 83.5% 1.3 N/A N/A
Defin
ition
s
The Final Rejection and Allow ance (Final Disposition) compliance rate focuses on the correctness of the examiners' overall determination of the patentability of the claims in the decision to f inally reject or allow an application. Metric determined by 12-month % Compliance as determined by OPQA random-sample-review of Allow ances and Final Off ice Actions.
The In-Process compliance rate focuses on the quality of examination early in prosecution, rather than on the end-product. Metric determined by 12-month % Compliance as determined by OPQA random-sample-review of Non-Final Off ice Actions.
12-month average of 5 Quality Index Reporting metrics being tracked for quality performance. Items are converted to "% desired behavior" for inclusion in Composite. Items tracked include:Actions per Disposal; RCEs as % of Total Disposals; Reopenings After Final; 2nd+ Action NonFinals; and Restrictions After First Action.
The External Quality Survey provides a measure of the degree to w hich the experience of patent applicants and practitioners reveal trends and issues indicative of quality concerns. The survey is conducted semi-annually and solicits input from stakeholders w ho are frequent customers of the USPTO on their perceptions of examination quality over the preceding three month period. The metric is reported as the ratio of positive to negative responses regarding satisfaction w ith overall examination quality.
The Internal Quality Survey measures the degree to w hich the experience of patent examiners reveals trends and issues indicative of quality concerns The survey is conducted semi-annually and ascertains examiner perceptions of their experiences w ith the various tools and inputs that are required to conduct a high quality examination. The metric is reported as the ratio of positive to negative responses to a question regarding overall satisfaction w ith examination quality.
The Quality Composite Score is composed of the seven individual metrics show n here. The composite metric determines progress in each component metric tow ards the desired f ive-year goal, applying a w eighting factor to each metric and summing the w eighted progress in each component metric to determine the overall progress tow ards the composite quality goal. A composite score of 0 represents the statistical achievement in the base year used for comparison. A composite score of 100 represents attainment of a superior level of performance identif ied as the stretch goal.
USPTO Patents Quality Composite Item - Actual MetricsReporting Period
The First Action On The Merits (FAOM) Search Review and Complete FAOM Review provide comprehensive assessments of the degree to w hich the search conducted prior to the f irst off ice action, and the f irst action on the merits, respectively, conform w ith best practices. Metric determined by OPQA random-sample, points-based-review of examiner w ork product. Score=Points earned/available points.
14
0255075
100125150175200225250275300325350375400425450475500525550
12/09 01/10 02/10 03/10 04/10 05/10 06/10 07/10 08/10 09/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 01/11 02/11 03/11 04/11 05/11 06/11 07/11 08/11 09/11 10/11 11/11
Await ing Decision Requests Granted Requests Dismissed Requests Denied Petit ions Received
Request Summary 12/09 1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 05/10 06/10 07/10 08/10 09/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 01/11 02/11 03/11 04/11 05/11 06/11 07/11 08/11 09/11 10/11 11/11 TotalPetitions Received 325 351 124 76 67 72 234 133 95 86 32 166 340 287 165 548 150 276 216 162 151 145 291 202 4,790Awaiting Decision (by month) 316 541 138 68 58 77 147 42 42 56 51 107 256 220 224 310 327 285 272 282 244 252 325 357Requests Granted (by month) 2 12 209 67 45 38 98 180 65 48 26 81 122 222 117 263 86 237 167 116 206 111 156 128 2,802Requests Denied (by month) 7 0 2 29 18 7 30 28 14 11 6 1 0 10 9 23 14 14 9 0 3 0 7 0 242Requests Dismissed (by month) 0 121 316 43 14 8 36 30 16 13 5 28 69 91 35 176 33 67 53 41 65 32 55 42 1,389
Green Technologies Pilot
Green Technologies Pilot December 2009 – November 2011
Average time from petition grant to final disposition: 262 daysShortest time from petition grant to final disposition: 57 daysLongest time from petition grant to final disposition: 638 days
15
Request Summary 1/10 2/10 3/10 4/10 05/10 06/10 07/10 08/10 09/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 01/11 02/11 03/11 04/11 05/11 06/11 07/11 08/11 09/11 10/11 11/11 TotalPetitions Received 16 14 6 1 1 3 8 18 42 19 13 25 9 9 4 6 4 6 2 1 1 0 0 208Aw aiting Decision (by month) 1 8 1 1 1 4 12 18 5 10 8 17 6 0 1 1 4 4 0 0 0 0 0Requests Granted (by month) 15 6 8 1 1 0 0 4 41 14 11 14 19 15 3 3 1 5 5 1 1 0 0 168Requests Dismissed (by 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 8 14 0 4 2 1 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 40
Project Exchange Pilot
Project Exchange Pilot January 2010 – November 2011
02468101214161820222426283032343638404244
01/10 02/10 03/10 04/10 05/10 06/10 07/10 08/10 09/10 10/10 11/10 12/10 1/11 2/11 03/11 04/11 05/11 06/11 07/11 08/11 09/11 10/11 11/11
Awaiting Decision Requests Granted Requests Dismissed Petitions Received
16
Request Summary SeptemberFY11
OctoberFY12
NovemberFY12
Number of Requests Entered in PALM 852 403 233Number of Request Allowed 9
Prioritized Examination (through November)
Patents end2end
• IT Overhaul for the 21st Century • Dynamic views of drawings, claims, and annotations • Greater Examination & Agency Efficiency
18
4/9/2012 19
America Invents Act
Goals of Patent Reform Legislation • Encourage innovation and job creation • Support USPTO's efforts to improve patent quality
and reduce backlog • Establish secure funding mechanism • Provide greater certainty for patent rights • Provide less costly, time-limited administrative
alternatives to litigation
24
Timeline: Major Milestones
25
Group 1 Rulemakings and Other Actions (60-Day and Under Effective Dates) (a.k.a. G1 Rulemakings)
Date of Enactment (September 16, 2011)
10 Days After Date of Enactment
(September 26, 2011) October 1, 2011
60 Days After Date of Enactment
(November 15, 2011) • Inter partes reexamination threshold
and termination • Tax strategies are deemed within the
prior art • Best mode • Human organism prohibition • Venue change from DDC to EDVA for
suits brought under 35 U.S.C. §§ 32, 145, 146, 154 (b)(4)(A), and 293
• OED Statute of Limitations
• Fee Setting Authority (effective after
rulemaking) • Establishment of micro-entity
(effective after rulemaking)
• Prioritized examination
• 15% transition
surcharge
Reserve fund
Electronic filing incentive
26
Group 2 Rulemakings (12-Month Effective Date, i.e., September 16, 2012) (a.k.a. G2 Rulemakings)
• Inventor’s oath/declaration • Third party submission of prior art for patent application • Supplemental examination • Citation of prior art in a patent file • Priority examination for important technologies
• Inter partes review
• Post grant review
• Transitional program for covered business method patents
27
Group 3 Rulemakings and Other Actions (18-Month Effective Date, i.e., March 16, 2013) (a.k.a. G3 Rulemakings)
• First-Inventor-to-File • Derivation proceedings • Repeal of Statutory Invention Registration
28
Studies: USPTO as Lead Agency
Study Topic Due Date from Enactment
International Patent Protection for Small Businesses
4 months
Prior User Rights 4 months
Genetic Testing 9 months
Misconduct Before the Office Every 2 years
Satellite Offices 3 years
Virtual Marking 3 years
Implementation of AIA 4 years
29
AIA Micro-Site http://www.uspto.gov/americainventsact
30
top related