[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 24 (Thursday, February 5, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6475-6481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-02398]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No.: PTO-P-2014-0043]
Request for Comments on Enhancing Patent Quality
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments; notice of meeting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is
seeking public input and guidance to direct its continued efforts
towards enhancing patent quality. These efforts focus on improving
patent operations and procedures to provide the best possible work
products, to enhance the customer experience, and to improve existing
quality metrics. In pursuit of these goals, the USPTO is launching a
comprehensive and enhanced quality initiative. This initiative begins
with a request for public comments on the set of proposals outlined in
this document and will continue with a two-day ``Quality Summit'' with
the public to discuss the outlined proposals. The conversation with the
public held at this Quality Summit, complemented by written comments to
these proposals, is the first of many steps toward developing a new
paradigm of patent quality at the USPTO. Through an active and long-
term partnership with the public, the USPTO seeks to ensure the
issuance of the best quality patents and provide the best customer
service possible.
DATES: Comment Deadline Date: To be ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before May 6, 2015.
The USPTO will hold a Quality Summit on March 25 and 26, 2015 at
the Madison Building, USPTO Headquarters, in Alexandria, Virginia. This
Summit will be broadcast via webinar and recorded for later viewing.
For webinar participants, participation in all Summit sessions,
including the group brainstorming sessions, will be possible. See the
Supplementary Information section for the proposed agenda. In order to
best prepare for the Quality Summit, the USPTO requests that those
interested in attending the Quality Summit send an email to
[email protected] indicating their planned attendance
by March 18, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent by electronic mail message
over the Internet addressed to: [email protected].
Comments may also be submitted by postal mail addressed to: Mail Stop
Comments--Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria,
Virginia 22313-1450, marked to the attention of Michael Cygan, Senior
Legal Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the
Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy.
Although comments may be submitted by postal mail, the USPTO
prefers to receive comments by electronic mail message over the
Internet because sharing comments with the public is more easily
accomplished. Electronic comments are preferred to be submitted in
plain text, but also may be submitted in ADOBE[supreg] portable
document format or MICROSOFT WORD[supreg] format. Comments not
submitted electronically should be submitted on paper in a format that
facilitates convenient digital scanning into ADOBE[supreg] portable
document format.
The comments will be available for public inspection at the Office
of the Commissioner for Patents, currently located in Madison East,
Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. Comments also
will be available for viewing via the USPTO's Internet Web site (http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Patent-Quality-Initiative.jsp).
Because comments will be made available for public inspection,
information that the submitter does not desire to make public, such as
an address or phone number, should not be included in the comments. It
would be helpful to the USPTO if written comments included information
about: (1) the name and affiliation of the individual responding; and
(2) an indication of whether comments offered represent views of the
respondent's organization or are the respondent's personal views.
[[Page 6476]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Cygan, Senior Legal
Advisor, at (571) 272-7700; Maria Nuzzolillo, Legal Advisor, at (571)
272-8150; or Jeffrey R. West, Legal Advisor, at (571) 272-2226.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The innovation that is fostered by a strong patent system is a key
driver of economic growth and job creation. Effectively promoting such
innovation requires that issued patents fully comply with all statutory
requirements and, of equal importance, that the patent examination
process advance quickly, transparently, and accurately. The USPTO has
taken steps to provide clear and consistent enforcement of its
statutory examination mandates. For instance, the USPTO has released
new training for examiners in the area of functional claiming, guidance
on subject matter eligibility of claims, and an improved classification
system for searching prior art. Additionally, the USPTO has begun to
implement long-range plans to improve its operational capabilities,
such as upgrading IT tools for its patent examiners through the Patents
End-to-End program and expanding international work-sharing
capabilities, all of which will help improve the quality of issued
patents.
Presently, the USPTO is launching a new, wide-ranging initiative to
enhance the quality of patents issued by the USPTO. High quality
patents permit certainty and clarity of rights, which in turn fuels
innovation and reduces needless litigation. Moreover and importantly,
for the first time in recent history, the USPTO has the financial
resources to consider longer-term and more expensive improvements to
patent quality by leveraging the sustainable funding model provided by
the fee setting provisions in the America Invents Act. The USPTO also
has made steady progress in reducing both the backlog of unexamined
patent application and patent pendency. The current backlog of
unexamined patent applications has dropped from a high of more than
764,000 in January 2009 to presently less than 605,000. Similarly, the
pendency from filing to a disposition has dropped from a high of 34.5
months in August 2010 to currently 27.0 months. While the agency still
has progress to make in further reducing both the backlog and pendency,
the confluence of these events make it the optimal time for the USPTO
to pursue this enhanced quality initiative.
Herein, the USPTO presents its approach to partnering with the
public in enhancing patent quality. Specifically, the USPTO is setting
forth its ongoing efforts to address quality and is announcing a
variety of proposals designed to further enhance patent quality.
Additionally, the USPTO is announcing a Quality Summit to dialogue with
the public about its new enhanced quality initiative and is seeking
written comments about the same.
The USPTO intends for this request for comments and the Quality
Summit to be the first of many conversations and collaborations with
the public as the USPTO continues to enhance patent quality. Through
this document, the USPTO presents various questions about its new
enhanced quality initiative and proposals. The purpose of these
questions is to stimulate the public's thinking on the larger topic of
patent quality, as well as focus discussion at the Quality Summit on a
limited number of concrete proposals. The public's response to these
questions will guide the agency in formulating, prioritizing, and
implementing changes to enhancing patent quality. Accordingly, the
USPTO welcomes the public's views on both the specific questions
included in the Notice and any other issues that the public's believes
to be important to patent quality. To communicate about events and
actions related to the enhanced patent quality initiative, the USPTO is
introducing a Web site: http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Patent-Quality-Initiative.jsp.
Lastly, the USPTO has held internal focus sessions with USPTO
employees, including patent examiners, to engage in discussions on how
to enhance quality at every step of prosecution. These internal
discussions will continue in parallel with the discussions being held
with the public through written comments to this document and in-person
at the Quality Summit. Engaging in a dialogue with examiners to receive
input from those who are responsible for the crucial day-to-day work of
examining applications and issuing high quality patents is essential to
initiating and sustaining the success of our quality enhancing efforts.
Patent Quality Pillars
As the USPTO commences its enhanced patent quality initiative, the
USPTO is targeting three aspects of patent quality, termed the ``patent
quality pillars.'' These pillars are:
(1) Excellence in work products, in the form of issued patents and
Office actions;
(2) excellence in measuring patent quality, including appropriate
quality metrics; and
(3) excellence in customer service.
As the first pillar, the USPTO is focusing on the quality of the
work products provided at every stage of the patent process. This
pillar includes both the quality of issued patents and the quality of
all work products during the filing, examination, and issuance process.
The USPTO is committed to issuing patents that clearly define the scope
of the rights therein, that are within the bounds of the patent
statutes as interpreted by the judiciary, and that provide certainty as
to their validity to encourage investment in research, development, and
commercialization.
The USPTO is committed to issuing patents that clearly define the
scope of the rights therein, that are within the bounds of the patent
statues as interpreted by the judiciary, and that provide certainty as
to their validity to encourage investment in research, development, and
commercialization. The USPTO recognizes that examiners are the
fundamental resource essential to building and strengthening the first
pillar. Examiners are the key building block to the infrastructure and
foundation needed to enhance and sustain quality. The USPTO is
committed to taking the steps necessary to evaluate the needs of
examiners to ensure that they have the tools, resources, and training
required to perform their jobs optimally and to provide a superior work
product.
Regarding the second pillar, the USPTO is focusing on its
measurement of quality to evaluate work products and customer
interactions. The USPTO welcomes the public's input on its measurement
of patent quality and how it may be improved.
Turning to the third pillar, the USPTO is focusing on the quality
of the customer experience. The USPTO seeks feedback to ensure that
customers are treated promptly, fairly, consistently, and
professionally at all stages of the examination process. The USPTO also
is focused on maximizing the effectiveness and professionalism of all
customer interactions, be it through examiner interviews, official
USPTO communications, or call center exchanges.
In moving forward with the enhanced quality initiative framed by
these three pillars, the USPTO seeks to deepen and refine its thinking
about general aspects of quality. To that end, the USPTO welcomes
feedback about the following questions that the public may wish to
address via written comments or at the Quality Summit. Moreover, the
USPTO solicits any other input outside of these questions that the
public believes can
[[Page 6477]]
lead to the issuance of higher quality patents.
Are there aspects of enhanced quality other than the three
``pillars'' previously described that should guide the USPTO's enhanced
quality initiative?
Are there any new or necessary changes to existing
procedures that the USPTO should consider to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of the examination process?
What should be included at the time of application filing
in order to enhance patent quality?
While specific questions have been provided to initiate
the discussion on patent quality, the USPTO solicits any other input
outside of these questions that the public believes can lead to the
issuance of higher quality patents.
Existing Quality Efforts
The USPTO has several ongoing efforts to improve the quality of
issued patents under the three patent quality pillars. The following
non-exhaustive list describes some of the recent initiatives that the
USPTO has undertaken to improve overall quality.
First, the USPTO has taken steps to provide more robust training to
examiners. In furtherance of a White House Executive Action designed to
keep examiners' technical knowledge current with the rapid advancements
in the state of the art, the USPTO initiated the Patent Examiner
Technical Training Program. Through this program, scientists,
engineers, professors, and industrial designers may volunteer to
participate as guest lecturers to examiners in their field of art. More
information on this program can be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/pettp.jsp. Additionally, the USPTO has adopted, and trained all
examiners on, the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) system. The
CPC is a multi-office classification system developed by the USPTO and
the European Patent Office to not only enhance the examiner's ability
to locate the most relevant art as efficiently as possible, but also to
enable work sharing with other patent offices around the globe.
Second, as part of its ongoing commitment to legal training, the
USPTO has developed training modules on claim clarity and functional
claiming and is in the midst of training all examiners on those
modules. These modules, which have been developed in furtherance of a
White House Executive Action on clarity in patent claims, focus on
evaluating functional claiming and improving the clarity of the
examination record. More information, including four training modules
provided to examiners on functional claiming, may be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/executive_actions.jsp#heading-2.
Additionally, the USPTO routinely provides legal training as the law
changes due to new legislation and case law developments. For example,
the USPTO has offered extensive training on the new provisions of the
America Invents Acts, as well as on subject matter eligibility in view
of recent judicial rulings. More information about these trainings may
be found respectively at http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/index.jsp and http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/exam/interim_guidance_subject_matter_eligibility.jsp.
Third, as a further initiative to enhance clarity in patent claims,
the USPTO has launched a voluntary glossary pilot program. This pilot
program provides a framework for applicants in certain fields of art to
include definitions of key claim terms within the patent specification
in exchange for expedited examination through a first Office action.
More information about this pilot may be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/glossary_initiative.jsp.
Fourth, the USPTO is engaged in pilot programs such as the Quick
Path IDS Program (QPIDS) and the After Final Consideration Pilot
(AFCP). Each of these programs serve to reduce pendency and improve
quality by more expeditiously identifying and resolving those issues
preventing the grant of a high-quality patent. Specifically, the QPIDS
pilot permits an examiner to consider an Information Disclosure
Statement after payment of the issue fee without the need to reopen
prosecution, effectively obviating the need to pursue a Request for
Continued Examination. The AFCP program allows applicants to submit an
amendment after final action for consideration by the examiner without
reopening prosecution. For more information on these pilot programs,
see respectively http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/qpids.jsp and
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/afcp.jsp.
Fifth, the USPTO has implemented programs to take advantage of the
search and examination work done in corresponding applications filed in
other intellectual property offices through a variety of international
cooperation efforts, for example, the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
program and the Common Citation Document program (CCD). The PPH enables
the USPTO to leverage fast-track examination procedures already in
place among participating foreign patent offices to allow applicants to
reach final disposition of a patent application more quickly and
efficiently than standard examination processing. The CCD program
consolidates the prior art cited by the five largest intellectual
property offices of the world (i.e., USPTO, EPO, JPO, KIPO, and SIPO)
for the family members of a patent application, thus enabling the
search results for the same invention produced by several offices to be
visualized on a single page. The CCD therefore enables USPTO examiners
to have a single point of access to up-to-date prior art information.
For more information, see respectively http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp and http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/search/index.jsp?tag=infraredheatersconsumerreports-20#heading-8.
Sixth, the USPTO has actively promoted interviews between
applicants and examiners throughout prosecution, including through
specific initiatives such as the First Action Interview Pilot Program.
Under this particular pilot, applicants are permitted to conduct an
interview with the examiner after reviewing a ``Pre-Interview
Communication'' from the examiner containing the results of a prior art
search conducted by the examiner. Through this interaction, the
examiner and the applicant are in a position to rapidly advance
prosecution of the application by resolving certain patentability
issues at the beginning of the prosecution process with the goal of
early allowance, when appropriate. For further details about the pilot,
see http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/faipp_landing.jsp.
Seventh, the USPTO continues to expand its assistance to
independent inventors through educational programs hosted by the Office
of the Innovation Development, as well as through the Pro Se Pilot
Examination Unit. The Pro Se Pilot Examination Unit is comprised of
experienced examiners from all scientific disciplines, who have
received training specific to issues most often encountered by pro se
applicants. The examiners communicate with the USPTO's pro se
applicants by providing customer support, answering general patent-
related questions via a toll-free number, email, or a walk-in service,
and spearheading the development of training materials on the
intricacies of filing a patent application. For further details on this
pilot, see http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_establishes_special_examination_unit.
Eighth, the USPTO has provided, in addition to its numerous call
centers, such as the Inventors Assistance Center and Application
Assistance Unit, a
[[Page 6478]]
dedicated customer service America Invents Act (AIA) Contact Center and
HELP-AIA hotline, to assist in navigating the America Invents Act,
including the new legal provisions and rules regarding inventor's oath
or declarations, supplemental examination, preissuance submissions,
citation of patent owner claim scope statements, post grant reviews,
inter partes reviews, and the transitional program for covered business
methods. This hotline implements the concept of guided assistance in
which the initial USPTO operator stays with the caller throughout the
call until the question is resolved rather than employ the often
typical paradigm where the operator routes the call to a call center
staffer. By using guided assistance for the AIA Contact Center, the
USPTO aims to give callers a ``one-stop-shopping'' experience and
eliminate the frustration that often occurs with call centers where a
call may be routed several times before the caller reaches a staffer
knowledgeable on the subject of the question.
Ninth, the USPTO is exploring the use of crowdsourcing under a
White House Executive Action to leverage the knowledge of those in the
technical and scientific community to uncover hard-to-find prior art.
The USPTO is currently investigating, through partnership with the
public, the most effective means of employing crowdsourcing to obtain
such art. At the same time, the USPTO is working to improve the
preissuance submissions process through which third parties submit
patents, published patent applications, or other printed publications
of potential relevance to the examination of a particular published
application. In particular, the agency has improved the electronic user
interface for making a submission to increase the volume of these
submissions and make it easier for an examiner to ascertain the
relevance of the art contained in the submission. More information on
crowdsourcing and preissuance submissions may be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/executive_actions.jsp#heading-6.
Tenth, as mentioned earlier, the USPTO measures and reports a
Quality Composite Metric composed of seven factors: (1) the final
disposition review; (2) the in-process review; (3) the first action on
the merits (FAOM) search review; (4) the complete FAOM review; (5) the
external quality survey; (6) the internal quality survey; and (7) the
quality index report. To facilitate an understanding of these metrics,
the USPTO has developed two brief videos and two documents explaining
the Quality Composite Metric, along with the Metric scores. These
videos and explanatory documents are available at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Patent-Quality-Initiative.jsp.
Lastly, the Patents End-to-End Program (PE2E) sets forth a new way
of processing patent applications by providing a single online
environment to manage examination activities and the work done across
multiple systems. Among other things, PE2E aims to reduce the number of
manual tasks required by examiners to access and coordinate their
systems so that their focus can remain on the essential task of
performing high-quality examination. Further, as part of PE2E, the
USPTO is investigating the design and implementation of an improved
notification system that would provide additional prosecution-related
alerts to patent applicants in real-time.
New Quality Proposals
Beyond the existing quality improvements, the USPTO seeks to make
additional enhancements and, to start, has developed six proposals for
the public's consideration and feedback. We recognize that enhancing
patent quality will require long-term and sustained efforts. These six
proposals are meant to renew the conversation about this very important
USPTO priority. We also intend that our conversation with the public
will not end after this document or upcoming Quality Summit, but
instead continue well into the future through a variety of fora.
At this time, the USPTO seeks to have a discussion with the public
about targeting the most desirable proposals and modifying and/or fine-
tuning those proposals to maximize the benefit to the patent system.
The USPTO also welcomes the public's input on other programs or
initiatives not reflected in the proposals that the public believes may
enhance patent quality. Recognizing that USPTO time and resources are
limited and must be balanced to support many efforts simultaneously,
the USPTO welcomes input on the prioritization of these proposals.
The USPTO invites the public to discuss these proposals and the
information above by sending written comments in response to this
document and/or by attending the USPTO Quality Summit. Following the
Quality Summit and the receipt of comments to this document, the USPTO
plans to continue its engagement about these proposals through a series
of additional events after making refinements, as needed, to the
proposals based upon the initial public feedback. The USPTO anticipates
hosting future events in locations across the country to solicit input
about the proposals and their operation before implementation. Through
such continued engagement with the public, the USPTO can take the
correct next steps towards improving the quality of patents issued.
The USPTO's six proposals for enhanced patent quality are
summarized in the table below, followed by a discussion of each
proposal for the public's consideration and comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pillar Title of proposal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1: Excellence in work products.... 1. Applicant Requests for
Prosecution Review of Selected
Applications
2. Automated Pre-Examination Search
3. Clarity of the Record
2: Excellence in measuring patent 4. Review of and Improvements to
quality. Quality Metrics
3: Excellence in customer service. 5. Review of Current Compact
Prosecution Model and the Effect on
Quality
6. In-Person Interview Capability
with All Examiners
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal 1 Under Pillar 1: Applicant Requests for Prosecution Review of
Selected Applications
The Office of Patent Quality Assurance (OPQA) conducts reviews of
randomly selected Office actions from examiners. The USPTO proposes a
mechanism for an applicant to request OPQA prosecution review of a
particular application where the applicant believes that the
application contains an issue that would benefit from further review.
An applicant would identify the application by serial number, which
would then be placed into a pool of applications for selection by OPQA
for review. Through this process, the applicant would be able to
[[Page 6479]]
bring issues to the attention of OPQA so that the Office can analyze
the data from the reviews to identify trends and challenges to better
inform future training and improvements to examination process.
Proposal 2 Under Pillar 1: Automated Pre-Examination Search
The USPTO is continuously looking into better ways to get the best
prior art in front of an examiner as soon as possible in the
examination process. One way this might be done is by an automated pre-
examination search. Currently, before an examiner begins substantive
examination, the examiner may request, at his/her discretion, that the
USPTO's Scientific and Technical Information Center (STIC) perform an
automated pre-examination search. To do so, STIC uses a computerized
linguistic tool, called the Patent Linguistic Utility Service (PLUS),
which includes an algorithm to analyze an application for the presence
of frequently-used terms. STIC then searches a database of prior art
limited to U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications for
references containing those terms to generate a list of possible
references for the examiner's consideration with the frequently-used
terms highlighted. With these references in hand as a starting point,
the examiner is positioned to begin substantive examination, which
includes their own search of the prior art done based upon a review of
the specification and actual claim language (as opposed to mere
frequently-used terms).
Given that computerized searching algorithms and database
technologies have advanced significantly in recent years, the USPTO is
seeking input on new tools that might be useful to conduct a pre-
examination search. For instance, the new tool might utilize a custom
extraction routine that enables keyword, stemming, concept-semantic,
and relational word searching capabilities. The USPTO's current pre-
examination search tool PLUS does not possess these functionalities.
Likewise, the new tool might employ more modern natural language search
queries, which PLUS also cannot do.
Proposal 3 Under Pillar 1: Clarity of the Record
The USPTO recognizes that, in order for the patent system to
fulfill its critical role in promoting innovation, issued patents must
not only fully comply with all statutory requirements, but also contain
an Official record that is unambiguous and accurate. Such a complete
record provides patent boundaries that are clearly defined to the
benefit of the patent owner, the courts, third-parties, and the public
at large, giving inventors and investors the confidence to take the
necessary risks to launch products and start businesses, and the public
the benefit of knowing the precise boundaries of an exclusionary right.
The USPTO is actively pursuing further measures and initiatives for
enhancing the clarity and completeness of all aspects of the Official
record during prosecution of an application. The USPTO is seeking to
initiate a discussion to identify procedures that could be made part of
standard examination practices to improve the clarity of the
prosecution record.
As an example of the USPTO's current efforts to improve the clarity
of the Official record, examiners have completed five training modules
on functional claiming under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). This training covers
identifying 112(f) limitations, interpreting those limitations under
the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, making the record
clear as to the presence and treatment of 112(f) type claims, and
evaluating 112(f) limitations in software-related claims for
definiteness, plain and customary meaning of terms, and treating claims
as a whole. Furthermore, the USPTO is providing training modules
covering other statutory requirements under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b)
and providing additional training to examiners on identifying
compliance to 35 U.S.C. 112 in continuation applications. A list of
upcoming training modules can be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/executive_actions.jsp.
The USPTO seeks the assistance of the public in identifying
procedures to enhance the clarity and completeness of the Official
record during prosecution of an application. Any and all ideas for such
procedures are invited for discussion. Exemplary procedures under
consideration include:
Making claim construction explicit in the record,
including the scope of claim terms, claim preambles, and functionally
defined clauses (e.g., wherein clauses).
Further detail in the recordation of interviews, pre-
appeal conference decisions, and appeal conferences, including
identifying which arguments presented in the interview overcome
individual rejections of record.
Where a statement of the reasons for allowance is
necessary, providing a more detailed summary of the reasons for
allowing a claim; for example, identifying the amendment, argument, or
evidence that overcomes a rejection of record, so as to clearly
communicate to the public the examiner's reasons why the claimed
invention is patentable.
Proposal 4 Under Pillar 2: Review of and Improvements to Quality
Metrics
The USPTO proposes to re-assess the effectiveness of the Quality
Composite Metric and welcomes stakeholder guidance on the effectiveness
of the current Metric, as well as ways to improve it. As noted earlier,
details about the Quality Composite Metric are available at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Patent-Quality-Initiative.jsp. By
reevaluating the Quality Composite Metric, the USPTO aims to increase
the effectiveness, transparency, clarity, and simplicity of USPTO
review, employ a system that measures both errors by commission and
errors by omission, and obtain examination metrics that are
specifically tied to procedures for improving performance based on
identified trends. Additionally, the USPTO proposes to re-evaluate its
current ways of measuring the impact of training provided to examiners
to enhance the effectiveness of examiner training.
Proposal 5 Under Pillar 3: Review of the Current Compact Prosecution
Model and the Effect on Quality
In an effort to resolve outstanding issues in an application before
prosecution on the merits closes, the USPTO seeks assistance from the
public on determining whether the current compact prosecution model
should be modified. Such revisions to the compact model seek to enhance
both the overall pendency and the quality of the prosecution. Under
normal compact prosecution practice, an applicant typically receives
only a single non-final Office action. The USPTO seeks ideas for
proactive alternatives to Request for Continued Examination filings or
appeals to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The goal of such an
alternative is to increase the quality of the communication between
applicant and examiner during prosecution, thereby focusing the
prosecution on resolution of patentability issues rather than on
concluding the prosecution. Such an increased emphasis on the
resolution of any and all patentability issues during prosecution may
enhance the quality of the patents that issue.
For example, the USPTO seeks feedback on the desirability of a
procedure by which an applicant might pay for entry of an additional
response that may or may not require an examiner interview to further
prosecution in an application before a final rejection is issued,
thereby
[[Page 6480]]
providing for at least two non-final Office actions in an application.
An additional response, either with or without an interview, may give
an applicant the opportunity to present arguments or amendments to
overcome outstanding rejections, which may result in a more efficient
and expeditious disposal of the application.
Proposal 6 Under Pillar 3: In-Person Interview Capability With All
Examiners
Effective interviews between the examiner and the applicant lead to
the issue of better quality patents and to greater customer
satisfaction with the prosecution. Currently, in-person interviews are
conducted at the USPTO Headquarters in Alexandria, VA. Interviews may
also be conducted at the fully operational USPTO Satellite Offices
(currently, Detroit and Denver) for those examiners stationed at those
Offices and for those examiners hoteling within the local commuting
areas of those Offices (e.g., within 50 miles). Although recent
improvements USPTO collaboration tools permit applicant interviews via
video, some applicants nevertheless prefer in-person interviews. The
USPTO thus proposes that in-person interviews could be conducted at
additional locations, such as at regional libraries across the country
that have partnered with the USPTO to serve as repositories for patent
materials, for example, the Boston Public Library, Chicago Public
Library, and Los Angeles Public Library. Upon a request for an in-
person interview with a specific examiner, the USPTO would designate an
acceptable remote interview location nearest to that examiner's
official duty station and provide arrangements for that examiner to
travel to the interview location and conduct the interview. This
proposal would ensure the availability of in-person interviews for all
applications as the USPTO refines its telework program and leverages
other USPTO affiliated locations. This proposal would have cost
implications on the USPTO, and the USPTO welcomes a discussion on the
public's desire and willingness to pay for such additional service.
Quality Summit
In addition to seeking written comments from the public and further
input from our employees, the USPTO is planning to hold a two-day
Quality Summit on March 25 and 26, 2015 in the Madison Building, USPTO
Headquarters, in Alexandria, Virginia. The Quality Summit is an
important opportunity for the public to voice their feedback and ideas
about quality to ensure the most efficient prosecution processes and
the issuance of the highest quality patents. Likewise, the USPTO
intends to utilize significant portions of the Summit to work with the
public to brainstorm additional options to enhance patent quality.
The agenda for the morning session of the first day of the Quality
Summit includes stakeholder presentations and a panel discussion on
``Perspectives on the Importance of Quality,'' as well as a discussion
about ``Key Aspects of Quality.'' The afternoon session of the first
day will be dedicated to the first pillar of quality, ``Providing the
Best Possible Work Products,'' by focusing on prosecution and
examination improvements. The agenda for the second day of the Quality
Summit will be dedicated to the second and third pillars of quality,
with the morning session covering ``Establishing Appropriate Quality
Metrics'' and the afternoon session directed to ``Improving the
Customer Experience and Providing Excellent Customer Service.'' When
discussing the three pillars of the Patent Quality Initiative and the
proposals, the USPTO intends to interact and listen to the public
through both large group discussions and small group brainstorming
sessions. During these discussions, the USPTO welcomes an in-depth,
specific, and expansive conversation about its proposals, as well as
any and all aspects of enhanced quality that the public would like to
raise. A more detailed agenda follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Time Topic
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAY 1: MORNING SESSION INTRODUCTION TO THE ENHANCED QUALITY INITIATIVE
AND DISCUSSION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF QUALITY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:30 to 8:40 am.............. Welcome.
8:40 to 9:00 am.............. Opening Remarks.
9:00 to 10:30 am............. Perspectives on the Importance of Quality
Speakers to include corporate counsel,
private practitioners, academics,
economists, and jurists.
10:30 to 10:45 am............ Break.
10:45 to 12:00 pm............ All Audience Discussion of Key Aspects of
Quality
12:00 to 1:00 pm............. Break for lunch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAY 1: AFTERNOON SESSION PROVIDING THE BEST POSSIBLE WORK PRODUCTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1:00 to 1:30 pm.............. Pillar 1: Overview of Currently Available
Improvements.
1:30 to 1:45 pm.............. Introduction of Proposals 1 and 2.
1:45 to 2:30 pm.............. All Audience Discussion of Proposals 1
and 2.
2:30 to 2:45 pm.............. Break.
2:45 to 4:45 pm.............. Brainstorming for Pillar 1 in General and
Proposals 1 and 2
Small group break-out session to be
followed by sharing of ideas with all
audience.
4:45 to 5 pm................. Concluding Remarks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAY 2: MORNING SESSION ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE QUALITY METRICS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:30 to 8:45 am.............. Welcome.
8:45 to 9:15 am.............. Pillars 1 and 2: Overview of Currently
Available Improvements and the Quality
Composite.
9:15 to 9:30 am.............. Introduction of Proposals 3 and 4.
9:30 to 10:15 am............. All Audience Discussion of Proposals 3
and 4.
10:15 to 10:30 am............ Break.
10:30 to 12:30 pm............ Brainstorming for Pillars 1 and 2 in
General and Proposals 3 and 4
Small group break-out session to be
followed by sharing of ideas with all
audience.
12:30 to 1:30 pm............. Break for lunch.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 6481]]
DAY 2: AFTERNOON SESSION IMPROVING THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE AND PROVIDING
EXCELLENT CUSTOMER SERVICE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1:30 to 2:00 pm.............. Pillar 3: Overview of Currently Available
Improvements.
2:00 to 2:15 pm.............. Introduction of Proposals 5 and 6.
2:15 to 3:00 pm.............. All Audience Discussion of Proposals 5
and 6.
3:00 to 3:15 pm.............. Break.
3:15 to 5:15 pm.............. Brainstorming for Pillar 3 in General and
Proposals 5 and 6
Small group break-out session to be
followed by sharing of ideas with all
audience.
5:15 to 5:30 pm.............. Concluding Remarks and Next Steps.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: February 3, 2015.
Michelle K. Lee,
Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2015-02398 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P