81 FR 73383 - Request for Comments on Examination Time Goals

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 206 (October 25, 2016)

Page Range		73383-73384
FR Document		2016-25758

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) is soliciting public feedback as part of an effort to reevaluate its examination time goals. Examination time goals vary by technology and represent the average amount of time that a patent examiner is expected to spend examining a patent application in a particular technology. The Office plans to use the public feedback as an input to help ensure that the Office's examination time goals accurately reflect the amount of time needed by examiners to conduct quality examination in a manner that responds to stakeholders' interests. In addition to accepting public feedback through the submission of written comments, the Office will provide the following avenues for increased interactive participation: IdeaScale[supreg], a Web-based collaboration tool that allows users to post comments and interact with the posted comments of others; and five roundtables that the Office will be conducting in: Alexandria, Virginia; Detroit, Michigan; Denver, Colorado; Dallas, Texas; and San Jose, California.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 206 (Tuesday, October 25, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73383-73384]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25758]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

 Patent and Trademark Office

[Docket No. PTO-P-2016-0040]


Request for Comments on Examination Time Goals

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

ACTION: Request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or 
USPTO) is soliciting public feedback as part of an effort to reevaluate 
its examination time goals. Examination time goals vary by technology 
and represent the average amount of time that a patent examiner is 
expected to spend examining a patent application in a particular 
technology. The Office plans to use the public feedback as an input to 
help ensure that the Office's examination time goals accurately reflect 
the amount of time needed by examiners to conduct quality examination 
in a manner that responds to stakeholders' interests. In addition to 
accepting public feedback through the submission of written comments, 
the Office will provide the following avenues for increased interactive 
participation: IdeaScale[supreg], a Web-based collaboration tool that 
allows users to post comments and interact with the posted comments of 
others; and five roundtables that the Office will be conducting in: 
Alexandria, Virginia; Detroit, Michigan; Denver, Colorado; Dallas, 
Texas; and San Jose, California.

DATES: Written Comments Deadline: To be ensured of consideration, 
written comments must be received on or before December 27, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent by electronic mail addressed 
to [email protected]. Comments also may be 
submitted by postal mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments--Patents, 
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, 
marked to the attention of Raul Tamayo, 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 Office 
prefers to receive comments by electronic mail in order to facilitate 
posting on the USPTO's Internet Web site (http://www.uspto.gov). 
Electronic comments may be submitted in plain text, ADOBE[supreg] 
portable document format, or MICROSOFT WORD[supreg] format. Comments 
not submitted electronically should be submitted on paper in a format 
that facilitates digital scanning into ADOBE[supreg] portable document 
format.
    The comments will be available for viewing via the USPTO's Internet 
Web site (http://www.uspto.gov). The comments also 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 22314. Because the comments will be made publicly 
available, information that the submitter does not desire to make 
public, such as an address or phone number, should not be included in 
the comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roundtable information, including 
roundtable registration information: Elizabeth Magargel, Strategic 
Planning Project Manager, Office of the Assistant Deputy Commissioner 
for Patent Operations, by telephone at (571) 270-7248.
    Written comments: Raul Tamayo, Senior Legal Advisor, Office of 
Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Deputy Commissioner for 
Patent Examination Policy, by telephone at (571) 272-7728.
    Examination time goals: Daniel Sullivan, Director Technology Center 
1600, by telephone at (571) 272-0900.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office has a staff of approximately 
8,400 patent examiners who examine patent applications in hundreds of 
technology areas. Each technology area is assigned an examination time 
goal. The goals are used by the Office for a variety of purposes, 
including forecasting pendency and staffing needs and evaluating 
individual examiner performance. The goals originally were assigned 
over 40 years ago and have been adjusted twice.
    Since the examination time goals were originally assigned, 
significant changes to the examination process have occurred, including 
increased use of electronic tools, changes in law due to court 
decisions, a growing volume of prior art, and progress in technology, 
which results in increasingly complex subject matter in applications. 
In addition, the Office recently transitioned from the United States 
Patent Classification (USPC) system to the Cooperative Patent 
Classification (CPC) system. Because the current examination time goals 
were assigned based on the USPC system, implementation of the CPC 
system has caused the Office to reconsider and reassess the assignments 
of examination time goals. Furthermore, the Office is (i) implementing 
the Enhanced Patent Quality Initiatives in order to provide a higher 
quality examination to our stakeholders and (ii) assessing the 
relationship between examination time and value-added examination 
activities, such as best practices for enhancing the clarity of the 
record with respect to claim interpretation, interview summaries, and 
reasons for allowance. All of these factors warrant a reevaluation of 
the Office's examination time goals.
    To help inform public comments responsive to this request for 
comments (RFC), the Office has prepared background material 
illustrating the use of examination time goals in the context

[[Page 73384]]

of individual examiner evaluation, and as an input into the model used 
to forecast pendency and hiring needs. These materials can be found at 
http://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta-external-outreach.
    The Office has generated the following list of questions concerning 
examination time goals to further inform comments responsive to this 
RFC. Responders to this RFC can choose to address as many of these 
questions as desired. Responders are not limited to submitting 
information addressing the questions below. The Office welcomes any 
other comments on the topic of this RFC that may be informative, for 
example those that facilitate an understanding of the interests of 
stakeholders with respect to quality, pendency, and cost for services. 
A further area of inquiry seeks to shed light on other characteristics 
of patent applications, besides technological complexity, which lead to 
a more time-consuming examination.
    (1) Do you perceive a difference in the quality of examination 
performed in complex technologies compared to less complex 
technologies? If yes, which do you perceive as higher quality and why? 
In what aspect(s) is the quality of examination higher?
    (2) What factors do you consider when estimating the amount of time 
needed to take various steps in prosecution, such as preparing 
responses to Office actions or preparing for interviews? In particular, 
if you prosecute applications in a variety of technology areas, how do 
those factors vary among the technologies?
    (3) Are the applications you prosecute more or less complex than in 
the past, e.g., 10 years ago? What factors contribute to the increase 
or decrease in complexity? Do you believe the increase or decrease in 
complexity has affected the amount of time it takes to prosecute the 
applications? If so, by how much? Do you believe the increase or 
decrease in complexity has affected the quality of examination? If so, 
how?
    (4) In order to increase the quality of examination, do you believe 
that an increase in the time allotted for examination should be 
designated for specific activities, such as interviews, or left to the 
discretion of the examiner? What activities would you prioritize and 
allocate more time to?
    (5) Are there any portions of Office actions which you feel do not 
add value or quality to the examination? If yes, what are they?
    (6) What other activities beyond examining, such as research or 
training, could examiners spend time on that would add value? Why do 
you believe these activities could add value?
    (7) While the focus of this request for comments and the 
roundtables is to find the appropriate amount of time for examination, 
cost and pendency are also contributing factors. Do these factors raise 
a concern that should be considered?
    In addition to accepting public feedback through the submission of 
written comments, the Office will provide an avenue for interactive 
participation using IdeaScale[supreg]. IdeaScale[supreg] allows users 
to post comments on a topic, and view and respond to others' comments. 
Users also may vote to indicate agreement or disagreement with a 
particular comment. Information on how to use IdeaScale[supreg] to 
comment on examination time goals is available at http://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta-external-outreach.
    The Office also will provide an avenue for interactive 
participation by conducting five public roundtables. Information on the 
first two roundtables to be conducted, in Alexandria, Virginia, and 
Dallas, Texas, including locations, dates, and how to participate, is 
set forth below.
    Alexandria and Dallas Roundtable Registration Information: 
Roundtables will be conducted in Alexandria, Virginia, and Dallas, 
Texas, as detailed below. Registration is required, and early 
registration is recommended because seating is limited. There is no fee 
to register for either roundtable, and registration will be on a first-
come, first-served basis. Registration on the day of either roundtable 
will be permitted on a space-available basis beginning 30 minutes 
before the roundtable.
    To register, please send an email message to 
[email protected] and provide the following 
information: (1) Your name, title, and if applicable, company or 
organization, address, phone number, and email address; and (2) which 
roundtable you wish to attend. Each attendee, even if from the same 
organization, must register separately. If you need special 
accommodations, e.g., due to a disability, please inform a contact 
person identified below.
    For more information on the Alexandria and Dallas roundtables, 
including the agenda for each roundtable and webcast access 
instructions for the Alexandria roundtable, please visit http://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta-external-outreach.

Alexandria Roundtable

    Alexandria Dates: Roundtable Date: The Alexandria roundtable will 
be held on Monday, November 14, 2016, beginning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern 
Standard Time (EST) and ending at 11:00 a.m. EST.
    Registration Deadline: Registration to attend the Alexandria 
roundtable in person or via webcast is requested by November 7, 2016. 
See the ``Roundtable Registration Information'' section of this notice 
for additional details on how to register.
    Address of Alexandria Roundtable: The Alexandria roundtable will be 
held at USPTO Headquarters in the Madison Building, Madison Auditorium, 
Concourse Level, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314.

Dallas Roundtable

    Dallas Dates: Roundtable Date: The Dallas roundtable will be held 
on Tuesday, November 29, 2016, beginning at 10:00 a.m. Central Standard 
Time (CST) and ending at 12:00 p.m. CST.
    Registration Deadline: Registration to attend the Dallas roundtable 
is requested by November 22, 2016. See the ``Roundtable Registration 
Information'' section of this notice for additional details on how to 
register.
    Address of Dallas Roundtable: The Dallas roundtable will be held at 
the USPTO's Texas Regional Office in the Terminal Annex Federal 
Building, 207 S. Houston Street, Suite 159, Dallas, TX 75202.

Detroit, Denver, and San Jose Roundtables

    Information on the roundtables to be conducted in Detroit, 
Michigan, Denver, Colorado, and San Jose, California will be provided 
at http://www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta-external-outreach as 
soon as it becomes available.

    Dated: October 19, 2016.
Russell Slifer,
Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy 
Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2016-25758 Filed 10-24-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2016 / Notices 73383

Estimated Total Annual Burden amount of time that a patent examiner FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hours: 1,231. is expected to spend examining a patent Roundtable information, including
Estimated Total Annual Cost to application in a particular technology. roundtable registration information:
Public: $46,877 in recordkeeping/ The Office plans to use the public Elizabeth Magargel, Strategic Planning
reporting costs. feedback as an input to help ensure that Project Manager, Office of the Assistant
Estimated Time per Response: the Office’s examination time goals Deputy Commissioner for Patent
Category E permit renewal, 1 minute; accurately reflect the amount of time Operations, by telephone at (571) 270–
At-Sea Herring Dealer Permit renewal, 5 needed by examiners to conduct quality 7248.
minutes; weekly dealer reports, 15 examination in a manner that responds Written comments: Raul Tamayo,
minutes; VMS activity declarations, 5 to stakeholders’ interests. In addition to Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Patent
minutes; VMS power-down exemption accepting public feedback through the Legal Administration, Office of the
letter, 5 minutes; VMS pre-landing submission of written comments, the Deputy Commissioner for Patent
notification and gear declaration, 5 Office will provide the following Examination Policy, by telephone at
minutes; catch reports and vessel trip avenues for increased interactive (571) 272–7728.
reports, 5 minutes; request for an participation: IdeaScale®, a Web-based Examination time goals: Daniel
observer prior to a trip, 5 minutes; collaboration tool that allows users to Sullivan, Director Technology Center
cancellation of trip, 1 minute; estimate post comments and interact with the 1600, by telephone at (571) 272–0900.
of catch/discard provision, 1 minute; posted comments of others; and five SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office
documentation of slippage, 5 minutes. roundtables that the Office will be has a staff of approximately 8,400 patent
IV. Request for Comments conducting in: Alexandria, Virginia; examiners who examine patent
Detroit, Michigan; Denver, Colorado; applications in hundreds of technology
Comments are invited on: (a) Whether Dallas, Texas; and San Jose, California.
the proposed collection of information areas. Each technology area is assigned
is necessary for the proper performance DATES: Written Comments Deadline: To an examination time goal. The goals are
of the functions of the agency, including be ensured of consideration, written used by the Office for a variety of
whether the information shall have comments must be received on or before purposes, including forecasting
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the December 27, 2016. pendency and staffing needs and
agency’s estimate of the burden evaluating individual examiner
ADDRESSES: Written comments should performance. The goals originally were
(including hours and cost) of the be sent by electronic mail addressed to
proposed collection of information; (c) assigned over 40 years ago and have
ExternalExaminationTimeStudy@ been adjusted twice.
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and USPTO.gov. Comments also may be
clarity of the information to be Since the examination time goals
submitted by postal mail addressed to: were originally assigned, significant
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the Mail Stop Comments—Patents,
burden of the collection of information changes to the examination process
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box have occurred, including increased use
on respondents, including through the 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450,
use of automated collection techniques of electronic tools, changes in law due
marked to the attention of Raul Tamayo, to court decisions, a growing volume of
or other forms of information Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Patent
technology. prior art, and progress in technology,
Legal Administration, Office of the which results in increasingly complex
Comments submitted in response to Deputy Commissioner for Patent
this notice will be summarized and/or subject matter in applications. In
Examination Policy. addition, the Office recently
included in the request for OMB
Although comments may be transitioned from the United States
approval of this information collection;
submitted by postal mail, the Office Patent Classification (USPC) system to
they also will become a matter of public
prefers to receive comments by the Cooperative Patent Classification
record.
electronic mail in order to facilitate (CPC) system. Because the current
Dated: October 20, 2016. posting on the USPTO’s Internet Web examination time goals were assigned
Sarah Brabson, site (http://www.uspto.gov). Electronic based on the USPC system,
NOAA PRA Clearance Officer. comments may be submitted in plain implementation of the CPC system has
[FR Doc. 2016–25733 Filed 10–24–16; 8:45 am] text, ADOBE® portable document caused the Office to reconsider and
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P format, or MICROSOFT WORD® format. reassess the assignments of examination
Comments not submitted electronically time goals. Furthermore, the Office is (i)
should be submitted on paper in a implementing the Enhanced Patent
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE format that facilitates digital scanning Quality Initiatives in order to provide a
into ADOBE® portable document higher quality examination to our
Patent and Trademark Office format. stakeholders and (ii) assessing the
[Docket No. PTO–P–2016–0040] The comments will be available for relationship between examination time
viewing via the USPTO’s Internet Web and value-added examination activities,
Request for Comments on site (http://www.uspto.gov). The such as best practices for enhancing the
Examination Time Goals comments also will be available for clarity of the record with respect to
AGENCY: United States Patent and public inspection at the Office of the claim interpretation, interview
Trademark Office, Commerce. Commissioner for Patents, currently summaries, and reasons for allowance.
located in Madison East, Tenth Floor, All of these factors warrant a
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

ACTION: Request for comments.
600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia reevaluation of the Office’s examination
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 22314. Because the comments will be time goals.
Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) is made publicly available, information To help inform public comments
soliciting public feedback as part of an that the submitter does not desire to responsive to this request for comments
effort to reevaluate its examination time make public, such as an address or (RFC), the Office has prepared
goals. Examination time goals vary by phone number, should not be included background material illustrating the use
technology and represent the average in the comments. of examination time goals in the context

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Oct 24, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM 25OCN1

73384 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 25, 2016 / Notices

of individual examiner evaluation, and would add value? Why do you believe Alexandria Roundtable
as an input into the model used to these activities could add value?
forecast pendency and hiring needs. Alexandria Dates: Roundtable Date:
(7) While the focus of this request for The Alexandria roundtable will be held
These materials can be found at http:// comments and the roundtables is to find
www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta- on Monday, November 14, 2016,
the appropriate amount of time for
external-outreach. beginning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard
examination, cost and pendency are also
The Office has generated the Time (EST) and ending at 11:00 a.m.
contributing factors. Do these factors
following list of questions concerning EST.
raise a concern that should be
examination time goals to further inform considered? Registration Deadline: Registration to
comments responsive to this RFC. attend the Alexandria roundtable in
Responders to this RFC can choose to In addition to accepting public
feedback through the submission of person or via webcast is requested by
address as many of these questions as November 7, 2016. See the ‘‘Roundtable
desired. Responders are not limited to written comments, the Office will
provide an avenue for interactive Registration Information’’ section of this
submitting information addressing the notice for additional details on how to
questions below. The Office welcomes participation using IdeaScale®.
IdeaScale® allows users to post register.
any other comments on the topic of this
RFC that may be informative, for comments on a topic, and view and Address of Alexandria Roundtable:
example those that facilitate an respond to others’ comments. Users also The Alexandria roundtable will be held
understanding of the interests of may vote to indicate agreement or at USPTO Headquarters in the Madison
stakeholders with respect to quality, disagreement with a particular Building, Madison Auditorium,
pendency, and cost for services. A comment. Information on how to use Concourse Level, 600 Dulany Street,
further area of inquiry seeks to shed IdeaScale® to comment on examination Alexandria, VA 22314.
light on other characteristics of patent time goals is available at http://
applications, besides technological www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta- Dallas Roundtable
complexity, which lead to a more time- external-outreach.
Dallas Dates: Roundtable Date: The
consuming examination. The Office also will provide an Dallas roundtable will be held on
(1) Do you perceive a difference in the avenue for interactive participation by Tuesday, November 29, 2016, beginning
quality of examination performed in conducting five public roundtables. at 10:00 a.m. Central Standard Time
complex technologies compared to less Information on the first two roundtables (CST) and ending at 12:00 p.m. CST.
complex technologies? If yes, which do to be conducted, in Alexandria,
you perceive as higher quality and why? Virginia, and Dallas, Texas, including Registration Deadline: Registration to
In what aspect(s) is the quality of locations, dates, and how to participate, attend the Dallas roundtable is
examination higher? is set forth below. requested by November 22, 2016. See
(2) What factors do you consider the ‘‘Roundtable Registration
Alexandria and Dallas Roundtable Information’’ section of this notice for
when estimating the amount of time
Registration Information: Roundtables additional details on how to register.
needed to take various steps in
will be conducted in Alexandria,
prosecution, such as preparing Address of Dallas Roundtable: The
Virginia, and Dallas, Texas, as detailed
responses to Office actions or preparing Dallas roundtable will be held at the
below. Registration is required, and
for interviews? In particular, if you USPTO’s Texas Regional Office in the
early registration is recommended
prosecute applications in a variety of Terminal Annex Federal Building, 207
because seating is limited. There is no
technology areas, how do those factors S. Houston Street, Suite 159, Dallas, TX
fee to register for either roundtable, and
vary among the technologies? 75202.
registration will be on a first-come, first-
(3) Are the applications you prosecute served basis. Registration on the day of
more or less complex than in the past, Detroit, Denver, and San Jose
either roundtable will be permitted on
e.g., 10 years ago? What factors a space-available basis beginning 30 Roundtables
contribute to the increase or decrease in minutes before the roundtable.
complexity? Do you believe the increase Information on the roundtables to be
or decrease in complexity has affected To register, please send an email conducted in Detroit, Michigan, Denver,
the amount of time it takes to prosecute message to ExternalExaminationTime Colorado, and San Jose, California will
the applications? If so, by how much? Study@USPTO.gov and provide the be provided at http://www.uspto.gov/
Do you believe the increase or decrease following information: (1) Your name, patent/initiatives/eta-external-outreach
in complexity has affected the quality of title, and if applicable, company or as soon as it becomes available.
examination? If so, how? organization, address, phone number,
Dated: October 19, 2016.
(4) In order to increase the quality of and email address; and (2) which
roundtable you wish to attend. Each Russell Slifer,
examination, do you believe that an
increase in the time allotted for attendee, even if from the same Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for
organization, must register separately. If Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of
examination should be designated for
you need special accommodations, e.g., the United States Patent and Trademark
specific activities, such as interviews, or
due to a disability, please inform a Office.
left to the discretion of the examiner?
contact person identified below. [FR Doc. 2016–25758 Filed 10–24–16; 8:45 am]
What activities would you prioritize and
allocate more time to? BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
For more information on the
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

(5) Are there any portions of Office Alexandria and Dallas roundtables,
actions which you feel do not add value including the agenda for each
or quality to the examination? If yes, roundtable and webcast access
what are they? instructions for the Alexandria
(6) What other activities beyond roundtable, please visit http://
examining, such as research or training, www.uspto.gov/patent/initiatives/eta-
could examiners spend time on that external-outreach.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:58 Oct 24, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\25OCN1.SGM 25OCN1

Document Created: 2018-02-13 16:38:33
Document Modified: 2018-02-13 16:38:33

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		Request for comments.
Dates		Written Comments Deadline: To be ensured of consideration, written comments must be received on or before December 27, 2016.
Contact		Roundtable information, including roundtable registration information: Elizabeth Magargel, Strategic Planning Project Manager, Office of the Assistant Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, by telephone at (571) 270-7248.
FR Citation		81 FR 73383

81 FR 73383 - Request for Comments on Examination Time Goals

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEPatent and Trademark Office

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 206 (October 25, 2016)

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office