81 FR 44845 - Post-Prosecution Pilot Program

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 132 (July 11, 2016)

Page Range		44845-44849
FR Document		2016-16423

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is initiating a Post-Prosecution Pilot Program (P3) to test its impact on enhancing patent practice during the period subsequent to a final rejection and prior to the filing of a notice of appeal. This Pilot Program responds to stakeholder input gathered during public forums held in support of the Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative. Under the P3, a panel of examiners, including the examiner of record, will hold a conference with the applicant to review the applicant's response to the final rejection of record. In order to participate in the P3, the applicant will be required to file a request for consideration under the P3 within two months from the mailing date of a final rejection and prior to filing a notice of appeal, together with a response to the final rejection and a statement that the applicant is willing and available to participate in the conference. The applicant will have the option of including in the response a proposed non-broadening amendment to a claim(s). The Office designed the P3 to increase the value of after final practice by (1) leveraging applicant input obtained through an oral presentation during a conference with a panel of examiners, and (2) also providing written explanation for the panel decision. The P3 is also designed to reduce the number of appeals and issues to be taken up on appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and reduce the number of Requests for Continued Examination (RCE), and simplify the after final landscape. This notice identifies requirements and procedures of the P3, which will govern entry into, and practice under, the P3. This notice also solicits public comments on the P3 and other suggestions to improve after final practice and reduce the number of both appeals to the PTAB and RCEs.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 132 (Monday, July 11, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 132 (Monday, July 11, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44845-44849]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16423]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

United States Patent and Trademark Office

[Docket No. PTO-P-2016-0012]

Post-Prosecution Pilot Program

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is
initiating a Post-Prosecution Pilot Program (P3) to test its impact on
enhancing patent practice during the period subsequent to a final
rejection and prior to the filing of a notice of appeal. This Pilot
Program responds to stakeholder input gathered during public forums
held in support of the Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative. Under the
P3, a panel of examiners, including the examiner of record, will hold a
conference with the applicant to review the applicant's response to the
final rejection of record. In order to participate in the P3, the
applicant will be required to file a request for consideration under
the P3 within two months from the mailing date of a final rejection and
prior to filing a notice of appeal, together with a response to the
final rejection and a statement that the applicant is willing and
available to participate in the conference. The applicant will have the
option of including in the response a proposed non-broadening amendment
to a claim(s). The Office designed the P3 to increase the value of
after final practice by (1) leveraging applicant input obtained through
an oral presentation during a conference with a panel of examiners, and
(2) also providing written explanation for the panel decision. The P3
is also designed to reduce the number of appeals and issues to be taken
up on appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and reduce
the number of Requests for Continued Examination (RCE), and simplify
the after final landscape. This notice identifies requirements and
procedures of the P3, which will govern entry into, and practice under,
the P3. This notice also solicits public comments on the P3 and other
suggestions to improve after final practice and reduce the number of
both appeals to the PTAB and RCEs.

DATES: Effective Date: July 11, 2016.
Duration: The P3 will accept requests beginning July 11, 2016,
until either January 12, 2017, or the date the Office accepts a total
(collectively across all technology centers) of 1,600 compliant
requests to participate under the P3, whichever occurs first. Each
individual

[[Page 44846]]

technology center will accept no more than 200 compliant requests,
meaning that the P3 may close with respect to an individual technology
center that has accepted 200 compliant requests, even as it continues
to run in other technology centers that have yet to accept 200
compliant requests.
Comment Deadline Date: Written comments must be received on or
before November 14, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to: afterfinalpractice@uspto.gov. Comments may also
be submitted by postal mail addressed to: United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Mail Stop Comments--Patents, Office of Commissioner
for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, marked to the
attention of Raul Tamayo. Although comments may be submitted by postal
mail, the Office prefers to receive comments by electronic mail message
over the Internet in order to facilitate posting on the Office's
Internet Web site.
The comments will be available for public inspection at the Office
of the Commissioner for Patents, located at Madison Building East,
Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. Comments also
will be available for viewing via the Office's Internet Web site
(http://www.uspto.gov). Because comments will be made available for
public inspection, information that is not desired to be made public,
such as an address or phone number, should not be included in the
comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raul Tamayo, Senior Legal Advisor
(telephone (571) 272-7728; electronic mail message
(raul.tamayo@uspto.gov)), Kery Fries, Senior Legal Advisor (telephone
(571) 272-7757; electronic mail message (kery.fries@uspto.gov)), or
Jeffrey West, Legal Advisor (telephone (571) 272-2226; electronic mail
message (jeffrey.west@uspto.gov)). Alternatively, mail may be addressed
to Raul Tamayo, Office of Commissioner for Patents, Attn: Post-
Prosecution Pilot Program, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Since 2005, the Office has administered the Pre-Appeal Brief
Conference Pilot Program (Pre-Appeal program), which provides an avenue
for a patent applicant to request a review of the basis of a
rejection(s) in a patent application prior to the filing of an appeal
brief. See New Pre-Appeal Brief Conference Pilot Program, 1296 Off.
Gaz. Pat. Office 67 (July 12, 2005). Specifically, when an applicant
files a notice of appeal together with a request to participate in the
Pre-Appeal program, a panel of examiners (including the examiner of
record) formally reviews the rejections of record in light of the
remarks provided in the request. The Pre-Appeal program benefits both
the applicant and the Office. For example, if the panel's review
determines that the application is not in condition for appeal, the
applicant can save the time and expense of preparing an appeal brief,
and the Office can save resources associated with an appeal to the
PTAB.
Since 2013, the Office has administered the After Final
Consideration Pilot Program 2.0 (AFCP 2.0). See After Final
Consideration Pilot Program 2.0, 78 FR 29117 (May 17, 2013). Under AFCP
2.0, examiners consider a response filed after a final rejection
pursuant to 37 CFR 1.116 that includes remarks and amendments that may
require further search and consideration, provided that at least one
independent claim includes a non-broadening amendment. The examiner
also may conduct an interview with the applicant when the response does
not place the application in condition for allowance. A goal of AFCP
2.0 is to reduce pendency by reducing the number of RCEs and
encouraging increased collaboration between the applicant and the
examiner to effectively advance the prosecution of the application.
The P3 program implemented through this notice combines effective
features from the Pre-Appeal and AFCP 2.0 programs with new features.
For example, the P3 provides for (i) an after final response to be
considered by a panel of examiners (Pre-Appeal), (ii) an after final
response to include an optional proposed amendment (AFCP 2.0), and
(iii) an opportunity for the applicant to make an oral presentation to
the panel of examiners (new). Finally, the panel decision will be
communicated in the form of a brief written summary. Section II of this
notice provides a more complete identification of the requirements and
procedures of the P3. This notice does not discontinue either the Pre-
Appeal or AFCP 2.0 pilot programs.

II. P3 Participation Requirements and Procedures

A. P3 Participation Requirements

To be eligible to participate in the P3, an application must
contain an outstanding final rejection and be (i) an original utility
non-provisional application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), or (ii) an
international utility application that has entered the national stage
in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371 (see 37 CFR 1.491). A continuing
application (e.g., a continuation or divisional application) is filed
under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) and is thus eligible to participate in the P3.
Reissue, design, and plant applications, as well as reexamination
proceedings, are not eligible to participate in the P3.
A request for a response under 37 CFR 1.116 to be considered under
the P3 must include the following items: (1) A transmittal form, such
as form PTO/SB/444, that identifies the submission as a P3 submission
and requests consideration under the P3; (2) a response under 37 CFR
1.116 comprising no more than five pages of argument; and (3) a
statement that the applicant is willing and available to participate in
the conference with the panel of examiners. Optionally, a P3 request
may include a proposed non-broadening amendment to a claim(s).
Only one P3 request will be accepted in response to an outstanding
final rejection. If prosecution is reopened and the Office subsequently
issues a new final rejection, the filing of a P3 request in response to
the new final rejection is permitted. Once a P3 request has been
accepted in response to a final rejection, no additional response under
37 CFR 1.116 to the same final rejection will be entered, unless the
examiner has requested the additional response because the examiner
agrees that it would place the application in condition for allowance.
There is no fee required to request consideration under the P3. All
papers associated with a P3 request must be filed via the USPTO's
Electronic Filing System-Web (EFS-Web).
To be eligible to participate in the P3, an applicant cannot have
previously filed a proper request to participate in the Pre-Appeal
program or a proper request under AFCP 2.0 in response to the same
outstanding final rejection, and once a P3 request is accepted, neither
a request to participate in the Pre-Appeal program nor a request for
consideration under AFCP 2.0 will be accepted for the same outstanding
final rejection.
1. Timing of the P3 Request
A P3 request must be filed within two months from the mailing date
of a final rejection and prior to filing a notice of appeal. A P3
request will be deemed untimely if it is filed (i) more than two months
from the mailing date of the final rejection, (ii) in an application
that does not contain an outstanding final

[[Page 44847]]

rejection (e.g., a P3 request will not be accepted in response to a
second action non-final rejection), (iii) in response to a final
rejection for which a proper AFCP 2.0 request has been filed, (iv) on
or after the date a RCE or notice of appeal is filed in response to the
same outstanding rejection, or (v) on or after the date an express
abandonment is filed. For information on how the Office will process an
untimely P3 request, refer to Section II.B.1 of this notice. For
information on how a P3 request will be treated if a RCE, notice of
appeal, or express abandonment is filed subsequent to the filing of the
P3 request, but prior to a decision on the P3 request, refer to Section
II.B.4 of this notice.
2. Transmittal Form
A P3 request must include a transmittal form. The Office advises
the use of form PTO/SB/444, which is available at http://www.uspto.gov/forms/index.jsp, as the transmittal form. Use of form PTO/SB/444 will
help the Office to quickly identify P3 requests and facilitate timely
processing. In addition, form PTO/SB/444 will help applicants
understand and comply with the requirements and procedures of the P3.
Under 5 CFR 1320.3(h), form PTO/SB/444 does not collect ``information''
within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
3. Response Under 37 CFR 1.116
A P3 request must include a response under 37 CFR 1.116. The
response must be a separate paper from the transmittal form, and must
comprise no more than five pages of arguments. Arguments are limited to
appealable, not petitionable, matters (e.g., an argument that the final
rejection was premature is a petitionable matter--see MPEP Sec.
706.07(c)). The Office considers arguments as encompassing, e.g.,
conclusions, definitions, claim charts, and diagrams. If the applicant
opts to include a proposed amendment in the response under 37 CFR
1.116, as further discussed at Section II.A.5 of this notice, arguments
presented in the response may be directed to the patentability of the
proposed amended claim(s). The sheet(s) of the response containing a
proposed amendment will not count towards the five-page limit. If the
applicant opts to include an affidavit or other evidence as part of the
response, entry of the affidavit or other evidence will be governed by
37 CFR 1.116. See MPEP 714.12. In addition, the affidavit or other
evidence will count towards the limit of no more than five pages of
arguments.
Form PTO/SB/444, or an equivalent transmittal that does not include
arguments, will not count towards the five-page limit. Additionally, a
page of the response that consists solely of, for example, a signature
will not be counted toward the five-page limit. Thus, for example, a
response that includes five pages of arguments and a sixth page that
includes conclusions and/or definitions would be treated as exceeding
the five-page limit. Furthermore, an applicant may not circumvent the
five-page limit by filing arguments in multiple separate documents. For
example, if an applicant files one document containing five pages of
arguments and an additional document containing arguments, the two
documents will be considered together to ascertain whether the five-
page limit has been exceeded.
The response may be single spaced, but must comply with the
requirements of 37 CFR 1.52(a). Additionally, the response may refer to
an argument already of record rather than repeat the argument. This
should be done by referring to the location of the argument in a prior
submission and identifying the prior submission by title and/or date
(e.g., see the argument at pages 4-6 of the paper titled ``Applicant's
Response to Final Office Action'' filed on October 1, 2015). A
reference to ``the arguments of record'' or ``the paper dated X''
without a pinpoint citation will not be considered under the P3.
4. Conference Participation Statement
The P3 request must include a statement by the applicant that the
applicant is willing and available to participate in the conference
with the panel of examiners. Form PTO/SB/444 includes the required
conference participation statement.
After the Office initially verifies that a P3 request is timely and
compliant, as further discussed at Section II.B.1 of this notice, the
Office will contact the applicant to schedule the conference. If within
ten calendar days from the date the Office first contacts the
applicant, the Office and the applicant are unable to agree on a time
to hold the conference, or the applicant declines to participate in the
conference, the request will be deemed improper and treated in
accordance with the discussion at Section II.B.1 of this notice.
The applicant may participate in the conference in-person, by
telephone, or by a video conferencing tool set up by the Office, such
as WebEx[supreg]. The conference will permit the applicant to present
to the panel of examiners in a manner similar to how an applicant
presents an argument in an ex parte appeal before the PTAB. The
applicant's participation in the conference will be limited to 20
minutes.
The applicant should advise the Office of any special needs as soon
as possible before participating in a conference. Examples of such
needs include an easel for posters or a projector. The applicant should
not make assumptions about the equipment the Office may have on hand
for the conference. Section II.B.2 of this notice provides more
information regarding the applicant's participation in the conference.
5. Option To Propose Amendment
The response under 37 CFR 1.116 included with a P3 request
optionally may include a proposed amendment to a claim(s). Entry of any
proposed amendment after a final Office action is governed by 37 CFR
1.116. See MPEP 714.12. In addition, a proposed amendment under the P3
may not broaden the scope of a claim in any aspect. For the purposes of
the P3, the analysis of whether a proposed amendment to a claim
impermissibly would broaden the scope of the claim will be analogous to
the guidance set forth in section 1412.03 of the MPEP for determining
whether a reissue claim has been broadened.
A proposed amendment that focuses the issues with respect to a
single independent claim is the type of proposed amendment that
provides the best opportunity for leading to the application being
placed into condition for allowance. A proposed amendment that contains
extensive amendments (either in terms of the nature of the amendment or
number of claims to be amended) probably will require extensive further
consideration and thus likely would not be effective to place the
application in condition for allowance. Extensive amendments will be
considered only to the extent possible under the time allotted to the
examiner under the P3.
The sheet(s) of the response containing a proposed amendment will
not count towards the five-page limit discussed at Section II.A.3 of
this notice. In accordance with 37 CFR 1.121(c)(1), the sheet(s) of the
response containing the proposed amendment may not contain arguments.

B. P3 Procedures

1. Technology Center Review
After receipt of a P3 request, the relevant technology center will
review the request to verify that it is timely, includes a transmittal
form, a response under 37 CFR 1.116 comprising no more

[[Page 44848]]

than five pages of arguments (exclusive of any proposed amendment), and
the conference participation statement, and otherwise complies with the
requirements of the P3 set forth at Section II.A of this notice. If the
request is timely and compliant, the technology center will contact the
applicant to schedule the conference.
If the review finds that the request is untimely or otherwise fails
to comply with the requirements of the P3, a conference will not be
held. The response and any proposed amendment filed with the request
will be treated under 37 CFR 1.116 in the same manner as any non-P3
response to a final rejection (except that if the request fails to
comply because a P3 request previously has been accepted in response to
the same final rejection, the response and any proposed amendment will
be entered only if the examiner requests them, as mentioned earlier at
Section II.A of this notice). The next communication issued by the
Office will indicate the reason that the request was found to be
untimely or otherwise non-compliant, the result of the treatment under
37 CFR 1.116 of the response and any proposed amendment filed with the
request, and the time period for the applicant to take any further
action that may be required as dictated by the facts. For example, if
the response and any proposed amendment filed together with an untimely
or otherwise non-compliant P3 request fails to place the application in
condition for allowance, the next Office communication will be an
advisory action. On the other hand, if the response and any proposed
amendment is enterable under 37 CFR 1.116 and places the application in
condition for allowance, the next Office communication will be a notice
of allowability.
If the review of a P3 request finds that the request is timely and
complies with the requirements of the P3, but the technology center
reviewing the request has reached its limit of 200 compliant requests
accepted, a conference will not be held. In this situation, the
response and any proposed amendment filed with the request will be
treated under 37 CFR 1.116 in the same manner as any non-P3 response to
a final rejection. The Office may need to take appropriate measures to
adjust an examiner's workload if the volume of requests for a P3
conference with any particular examiner becomes excessive.
It is critical for P3 participants to understand that the filing of
a P3 request will not toll the six-month statutory period for reply to
the final rejection. To avoid abandonment, further action, such as the
filing of a notice of appeal or RCE, will need to be taken within the
six-month statutory period for responding to the final rejection,
unless the applicant receives written notice from the Office that the
application has been allowed or that prosecution is being reopened.

2. The Post-Prosecution Pilot Conference

After the Office initially verifies that a P3 request is timely and
compliant as discussed at Section II.B.1 of this notice, a Supervisory
Patent Examiner (SPE) (preferably the SPE of the examiner of record)
will coordinate a panel experienced in the relevant field of technology
to review the response under 37 CFR 1.116 filed with the P3 request.
The panel may include the examiner of record, the SPE, and a primary
examiner (preferably the signing primary examiner for the examiner of
record, if the examiner of record is a junior examiner). Every
reasonable attempt will be made to select panel members with the most
expertise in the relevant technological and legal issues raised by the
application under consideration.
Concurrently, the Office will contact the applicant to schedule the
conference. The applicant may arrange to participate in-person, by
telephone, or by a video conferencing tool, such as WebEx[supreg].
Although the Office will make every reasonable attempt to accommodate
the applicant and timely schedule the conference, scheduling of the
conference lies within the full discretion of the Office. If within ten
calendar days from when the Office first contacts the applicant, the
Office and the applicant are unable to agree on a time to hold the
conference, or if the applicant declines to participate in the
conference, the request will be deemed improper and treated in
accordance with the discussion at Section II.B.1 of this notice. If the
examiner of record is unable to participate on the scheduled date of
the conference and rescheduling is not possible, the conference will
proceed and the other conferees will gather input from the examiner
prior to the conference if possible. The remaining conferees may, at
their discretion, opt to include in the panel another examiner from the
pertinent art.
The conference will begin with the applicant's presentation, which
is limited to 20 minutes. The applicant will be excused from the
conference at the end of the presentation. Any materials used by the
applicant during the presentation, e.g., a PowerPoint[supreg] or
exhibit, will be placed in the file and will not count against the
five-page limit on arguments. Entry of an affidavit or other evidence
included as part of the presentation materials is governed by 37 CFR
1.116. See MPEP 714.12.
The applicant may present on appealable, not petitionable, matters
(e.g., applicant may not present an argument that the final rejection
was premature). The applicant may present arguments directed to the
outstanding record, and, if the response filed with the P3 request
includes a proposed amendment, the applicant also may present arguments
directed to the patentability of the amended claim(s).
3. The Notice of Decision From Post-Prosecution Pilot Conference
The applicant will be informed of the panel's decision in writing
via the mailing of a Notice of Decision from Post-Prosecution Pilot
Conference (form PTO-2324). For an accepted P3 request (refer to
Section II.B.1 of this notice for the procedure that will be followed
for an untimely or non-compliant P3 request), the notice of decision
will indicate one of the following: (a) Final rejection upheld; (b)
allowable application; or (c) reopen prosecution. In appropriate
circumstances, a proposed amendment may accompany the notice of
decision proposing changes that, if accepted, may result in an
indication of allowability.
a. Final Rejection Upheld
If the notice of decision indicates ``final rejection upheld,'' the
notice of decision will not contain any additional grounds of rejection
or any restatement of a previously made rejection. Instead, the notice
of decision will summarize the status of the pending claims (allowed,
objected to, rejected, or withdrawn from consideration) and the reasons
for maintaining any rejection, and include an indication of any
rejection that has been withdrawn as a result of the conference.
For a P3 request that includes a proposed amendment as part of the
response under 37 CFR 1.116, a notice of decision indicating ``final
rejection upheld'' also will communicate the status of the proposed
amendment for purposes of appeal (entered/not entered). If the proposed
amendment is entered for purposes of appeal, and the notice of decision
indicates which individual rejection(s) set forth in the final Office
action would be used to reject the amended claim(s), then any
subsequent examiner's answer may include the rejection(s) of the
amended claim(s), and such rejection(s) made in the examiner's answer
would not be considered a new ground of rejection.
If a notice of decision indicates ``final rejection upheld,'' the
time period for

[[Page 44849]]

taking further action in response to the final rejection expires on (1)
the mailing date of the notice of decision; or (2) the date set forth
in the final rejection, whichever is later. As discussed previously, to
avoid abandonment, the applicant must file a notice of appeal or RCE
within the statutory period for response to the final rejection.
Extensions of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a), but the
period for response may not be extended beyond the six-month statutory
period for response.
A notice of decision indicating ``final rejection upheld'' is not
petitionable. A decision to maintain a rejection is subject to appeal.
Accordingly, the Office will not grant a petition seeking
reconsideration of a panel decision upholding the final rejection. The
applicant maintains the right of appeal under 35 U.S.C. 134 by filing a
notice of appeal and an appeal brief and having the appeal considered
by the PTAB.
b. Allowable Application
If the notice of decision indicates ``allowable application,'' the
notice of decision will be mailed concurrently with a Notice of
Allowance, and the notice of decision will state that the rejection(s)
is/are withdrawn
c. Reopen Prosecution
If the notice of decision indicates ``reopen prosecution,'' the
notice of decision will state that the rejection(s) is/are withdrawn
and a new Office action will be mailed. The notice of decision also
will state that no further action is required by the applicant until
further notice.
4. Actions That Will Terminate a Post-Prosecution Pilot Conference
If the applicant files any of the following after the date of
filing a P3 request, but prior to a notice of decision from the panel
of examiners, processing of the P3 request will end without a decision
on the merits of the P3 request: a notice of appeal; a RCE; an express
abandonment under 37 CFR 1.138; a request for the declaration of
interference; or a petition requesting the institution of a derivation
proceeding. The response and any proposed amendment filed with the
request will be treated under 37 CFR 1.116 in the same manner as any
non-P3 response to a final rejection. The next communication issued by
the Office will indicate the reason that processing of the P3 request
was terminated, the result of the treatment under 37 CFR 1.116 of the
response and any proposed amendment filed with the request, and the
time period for the applicant to take any further action that may be
required as dictated by the facts.
In addition, as stated earlier, once a P3 request has been accepted
in response to a final rejection, no additional response under 37 CFR
1.116 to the same final rejection will be entered, other than one that
the examiner has requested because the examiner agrees it would place
the application in condition for allowance. This condition of the P3
holds true regardless of whether the additional response is filed prior
to, on the same day as, or after a notice of decision from the panel of
examiners.
Finally, at any point during the processing of a P3 request, the
examiner may enter an Examiner's Amendment placing the application in
condition for allowance.

III. Request for Comments

The Office has three main goals for the P3: (1) Increase the value
of after final practice; (2) reduce the number of appeals and the
issues to be taken on appeal to the PTAB and the number of RCEs; and
(3) streamline the options available to an applicant during after final
practice. The Office is requesting public comment on the P3 and other
suggestions to improve after final practice and reduce the number of
both appeals and issues taken up for appeal to the PTAB and RCEs. The
Office plans to evaluate the public feedback and the balance between
the degree to which the P3 achieves its goals and the examining
resources it expends. The Office will provide advance notification
before modifying and/or extending the P3 or making the P3 permanent.

Dated: July 7, 2016.
Michelle K. Lee,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2016-16423 Filed 7-8-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 132 / Monday, July 11, 2016 / Notices 44845

Teleconference number is (907) 271– DATES: The joint meeting will take place DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
2896. on August 4–5, 2016. The meeting will
Council address: North Pacific begin at 1:30 p.m. on August 4 and United States Patent and Trademark
Fishery Management Council, 605 W. conclude at 3 p.m. on August 5. The Office
4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK joint meeting will be broadcast via [Docket No. PTO–P–2016–0012]
99501–2252; telephone (907) 271–2809. webinar. Registration information will
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be posted on the SAFMC Web site at Post-Prosecution Pilot Program
Diana Evans, Council staff; telephone: www.safmc.net as it becomes available. AGENCY: United States Patent and
907–271–2809. Trademark Office, Commerce.
ADDRESSES: The joint meeting will be
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Notice; request for comment.
held at the Crowne Plaza hotel; 4831
Agenda Tanger Outlet Boulevard, North
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Charleston, SC 29418; phone: (843) 744– Trademark Office (Office) is initiating a
Tuesday, July 26, 2016 Through
Thursday, July 28, 2016 4422; fax: (843) 744–4472. Post-Prosecution Pilot Program (P3) to
Council address: South Atlantic test its impact on enhancing patent
The agenda will include an update on
Fishery Management Council, 4055 practice during the period subsequent to
the 2016 pre-implementation program,
Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, N. a final rejection and prior to the filing
briefing on Northeast and West coast
Charleston, SC 29405. of a notice of appeal. This Pilot Program
EM (electronic monitoring) programs,
responds to stakeholder input gathered
review of draft EM analysis, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim during public forums held in support of
development of the 2017 pre- Iverson, Public Information Officer, the Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative.
implementation plan, and other SAFMC; phone: (843) 571–4366 or toll Under the P3, a panel of examiners,
business and scheduling. The Agenda is free (866) SAFMC–10; fax: (843) 769– including the examiner of record, will
subject to change, and the latest version 4520; email: kim.iverson@safmc.net. hold a conference with the applicant to
will be posted at http://www.npfmc review the applicant’s response to the
.org/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Council’s Law Enforcement Advisory final rejection of record. In order to
Special Accommodations participate in the P3, the applicant will
Panel and Law Enforcement Committee
be required to file a request for
These meetings are physically will meet jointly to address several
consideration under the P3 within two
accessible to people with disabilities. items including proper stowage of months from the mailing date of a final
Requests for sign language spearfishing gear for vessels transiting rejection and prior to filing a notice of
interpretation or other auxiliary aids through closed areas, enhancing appeal, together with a response to the
should be directed to Shannon Gleason, compliance with future reporting final rejection and a statement that the
at (907) 271–2809, at least 7 working requirements for for-hire vessels, utility applicant is willing and available to
days prior to the meeting date. of Operator Cards, enforcement of newly participate in the conference. The
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. implemented regulations regarding applicant will have the option of
Dated: July 6, 2016. transport of fillets from The Bahamas, including in the response a proposed
Tracey L. Thompson, Joint Enforcement Agreement (JEA) non-broadening amendment to a
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable activities, and inclusion of Council’s claim(s). The Office designed the P3 to
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. managed areas (i.e., Marine Protected increase the value of after final practice
[FR Doc. 2016–16308 Filed 7–8–16; 8:45 am] Areas, Spawning Special Management by (1) leveraging applicant input
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
Zones) in navigation charts. Meeting obtained through an oral presentation
participants will also receive a during a conference with a panel of
presentation on a marine managed areas examiners, and (2) also providing
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE mapping project. written explanation for the panel
decision. The P3 is also designed to
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Special Accommodations reduce the number of appeals and issues
Administration to be taken up on appeal to the Patent
These meetings are physically
Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and
RIN 0648–XE722 accessible to people with disabilities. reduce the number of Requests for
Requests for auxiliary aids should be Continued Examination (RCE), and
South Atlantic Fishery Management directed to the council office (see simplify the after final landscape. This
Council; Public Meetings ADDRESSES) 3 days prior to the meeting. notice identifies requirements and
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Note: The times and sequence procedures of the P3, which will govern
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and specified in this agenda are subject to entry into, and practice under, the P3.
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), change. This notice also solicits public
Commerce. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
comments on the P3 and other
ACTION: Notice of a joint meeting of the suggestions to improve after final
Dated: July 6, 2016. practice and reduce the number of both
Law Enforcement Advisory Panel and
Law Enforcement Committee. Tracey L. Thompson, appeals to the PTAB and RCEs.
DATES: Effective Date: July 11, 2016.
sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable
SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. Duration: The P3 will accept requests
Management Council’s (Council) Law [FR Doc. 2016–16356 Filed 7–8–16; 8:45 am] beginning July 11, 2016, until either
Enforcement Advisory Panel and Law BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
January 12, 2017, or the date the Office
Enforcement Committee will meet accepts a total (collectively across all
jointly to address issues pertaining to technology centers) of 1,600 compliant
enforcement of fisheries regulations in requests to participate under the P3,
the South Atlantic Region. whichever occurs first. Each individual

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jul 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM 11JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 132 / Monday, July 11, 2016 / Notices 44849

taking further action in response to the the time period for the applicant to take following meeting of the Board of
final rejection expires on (1) the mailing any further action that may be required Regents, Uniformed Services University
date of the notice of decision; or (2) the as dictated by the facts. of the Health Sciences (‘‘the Board’’).
date set forth in the final rejection, In addition, as stated earlier, once a DATES: Tuesday, August 2, 2016, from
whichever is later. As discussed P3 request has been accepted in 8:00 a.m. to 10:45 a.m. (Open Session)
previously, to avoid abandonment, the response to a final rejection, no and 10:50 a.m. to 11:45 a.m. (Closed
applicant must file a notice of appeal or additional response under 37 CFR 1.116 Session).
RCE within the statutory period for to the same final rejection will be
ADDRESSES: Uniformed Services
response to the final rejection. entered, other than one that the
University of the Health Sciences, 4301
Extensions of time may be obtained examiner has requested because the Jones Bridge Road, Everett Alvarez Jr.
under 37 CFR 1.136(a), but the period examiner agrees it would place the Board of Regents Room (D3001),
for response may not be extended application in condition for allowance. Bethesda, Maryland 20814.
beyond the six-month statutory period This condition of the P3 holds true
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
for response. regardless of whether the additional
A notice of decision indicating ‘‘final Jennifer Nuetzi James, Designated
response is filed prior to, on the same
rejection upheld’’ is not petitionable. A Federal Officer, 4301 Jones Bridge Road,
day as, or after a notice of decision from
decision to maintain a rejection is D3002, Bethesda, Maryland 20814;
the panel of examiners.
subject to appeal. Accordingly, the Finally, at any point during the telephone 301–295–3066; email
Office will not grant a petition seeking processing of a P3 request, the examiner jennifer.nuetzi-james@usuhs.edu.
reconsideration of a panel decision may enter an Examiner’s Amendment SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
upholding the final rejection. The placing the application in condition for meeting notice is being published under
applicant maintains the right of appeal allowance. the provisions of the Federal Advisory
under 35 U.S.C. 134 by filing a notice Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C.,
of appeal and an appeal brief and III. Request for Comments Appendix, as amended), the
having the appeal considered by the The Office has three main goals for Government in the Sunshine Act of
PTAB. the P3: (1) Increase the value of after 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and
final practice; (2) reduce the number of 41 CFR 102–3.150.
b. Allowable Application appeals and the issues to be taken on Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose
If the notice of decision indicates appeal to the PTAB and the number of of the meeting is to provide advice and
‘‘allowable application,’’ the notice of RCEs; and (3) streamline the options recommendations to the Secretary of
decision will be mailed concurrently available to an applicant during after Defense, through the Under Secretary of
with a Notice of Allowance, and the final practice. The Office is requesting Defense for Personnel and Readiness, on
notice of decision will state that the public comment on the P3 and other academic and administrative matters
rejection(s) is/are withdrawn suggestions to improve after final critical to the full accreditation and
practice and reduce the number of both successful operation of the University.
c. Reopen Prosecution These actions are necessary for the
appeals and issues taken up for appeal
If the notice of decision indicates to the PTAB and RCEs. The Office plans University to pursue its mission, which
‘‘reopen prosecution,’’ the notice of to evaluate the public feedback and the is to educate, train and comprehensively
decision will state that the rejection(s) balance between the degree to which the prepare uniformed services health
is/are withdrawn and a new Office P3 achieves its goals and the examining professionals, officers, scientists and
action will be mailed. The notice of resources it expends. The Office will leaders to support the Military and
decision also will state that no further provide advance notification before Public Health Systems, the National
action is required by the applicant until modifying and/or extending the P3 or Security and National Defense Strategies
further notice. making the P3 permanent. of the United States, and the readiness
of our Uniformed Services.
4. Actions That Will Terminate a Post- Dated: July 7, 2016. Agenda: The actions scheduled to
Prosecution Pilot Conference Michelle K. Lee, occur include the review of the minutes
If the applicant files any of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual from the Board meeting held on May 20,
following after the date of filing a P3 Property and Director of the United States 2016; recommendations regarding the
request, but prior to a notice of decision Patent and Trademark Office. awarding of post-baccalaureate degrees;
from the panel of examiners, processing [FR Doc. 2016–16423 Filed 7–8–16; 8:45 am] recommendations regarding the
of the P3 request will end without a BILLING CODE 3510–16–P approval of faculty appointments and
decision on the merits of the P3 request: promotions; and recommendations
a notice of appeal; a RCE; an express regarding award nominations. The
abandonment under 37 CFR 1.138; a DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE University President will provide a
request for the declaration of report on recent actions affecting
interference; or a petition requesting the Office of the Secretary academic and operational aspects of the
institution of a derivation proceeding. University. Member Reports will
The response and any proposed Board of Regents, Uniformed Services include an Academics Summary
amendment filed with the request will University of the Health Sciences; consisting of reports from the Dean of
be treated under 37 CFR 1.116 in the Notice of Federal Advisory Committee the School of Medicine, Dean of the
same manner as any non-P3 response to Meeting Graduate School of Nursing, Executive
sradovich on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES

a final rejection. The next AGENCY: Department of Defense; Dean of the Postgraduate Dental College,
communication issued by the Office Uniformed Services University of the and the Vice President for Research.
will indicate the reason that processing Health Sciences (‘‘the University’’). Member Reports will also include a
of the P3 request was terminated, the ACTION: Quarterly meeting notice. Finance and Administration Summary
result of the treatment under 37 CFR consisting of reports from the Senior
1.116 of the response and any proposed SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is Vice President, Southern Region; Senior
amendment filed with the request, and publishing this notice to announce the Vice President, Western Region; Vice

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jul 08, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11JYN1.SGM 11JYN1

Document Created: 2016-07-09 00:21:43
Document Modified: 2016-07-09 00:21:43

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice; request for comment.
Contact		Raul Tamayo, Senior Legal Advisor (telephone (571) 272-7728; electronic mail message ([email protected])), Kery Fries, Senior Legal Advisor (telephone (571) 272-7757; electronic mail message ([email protected])), or Jeffrey West, Legal Advisor (telephone (571) 272-2226; electronic mail
FR Citation		81 FR 44845

81 FR 44845 - Post-Prosecution Pilot Program

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEUnited States Patent and Trademark Office

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 132 (July 11, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office