Please use your    Go Back Key Image     key to return to the previous page.

 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print Table of Contents 1396 OG 155 

OFFICIAL GAZETTE of the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

November 26, 2013 Volume 1396 Number 4

CONTENTS

 Patent and Trademark Office NoticesPage 
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Information1396 OG 156
Notice of Maintenance Fees Payable1396 OG 159
Notice of Expiration of Patents Due to Failure to Pay Maintenance Fee1396 OG 160
Erratum1396 OG 182
Patents Reinstated Due to the Acceptance of a Late Maintenance Fee from 10/28/20131396 OG 183
Reissue Applications Filed1396 OG 184
Requests for Ex Parte Reexamination Filed1396 OG 186
Notice of Expiration of Trademark Registrations Due to Failure to Renew1396 OG 187
37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication1396 OG 194
Registration to Practice1396 OG 195
Patent Public Advisory Committee Annual Report 20131396 OG 197
Trademark Public Advisory Committee Annual Report 20131396 OG 198
Errata1396 OG 199
Certificates of Correction1396 OG 203
Summary of Final Decisions Issued by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board1396 OG 205

Mailing and Hand Carry Addresses for Mail to the United States Patent and Trademark Office
Reference Collections of U.S. Patents Available for Public Use in Patent and Trademark Resource Centers
Patent Technology Centers



COPIES OF PATENTS are furnished by the Patent and Trademark Office at $3.00 each; PLANT PATENTS in color, $15.00 each; copies of TRADEMARKS at $3.00 each. Address orders to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA., 22313-1450, or click here for online ordering.


Printing by U.S.P.T.O. in electronic form is authorized by 35 U.S.C. § 10(a)3


Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 156 

Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Information
                  Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Information

   For information concerning PCT member countries, see the notice
appearing in the Official Gazette at 1393 O.G. 58, on August 13, 2013.

   For information on subject matter under Rule 39 that a particular
International Searching Authority will not search, see Annex D of the PCT
Applicants' Guide.

European Patent Office as Searching and Examining Authority

   The European Patent Office (EPO) may act as the International Searching
Authority (ISA) or the International Preliminary Examining Authority (IPEA)
for an international application filed with the United States Receiving
Office or the International Bureau (IB) as Receiving Office where at least
one of the applicants is either a national or resident of the United States
of America. However, the use of the EPO is restricted. The EPO will not act
as an ISA for applications with one or more claims directed to a business
method. For the definition of what the EPO considers to be precluded
subject matter in the field of business methods, see PCT Applicants's
Guide, Annexes D(EP), E(EP) and the Official Notices (PCT Gazette) dated
May 6, 2010, page 94
(http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/official_notices/index.html). The EPO will act
as an IPEA only if it also acted as the ISA.

   The search fee of the European Patent Office was decreased, effective
January 1, 2013, and was announced in the Official Gazette at 1385 O.G. 176,
on December 25, 2012.

Korean Intellectual Property Office as Searching and Examining Authority

The Korean Intellectual Property Office may act as the ISA or the IPEA for
an international application filed with the United States Receiving Office
or the International Bureau (IB) as Receiving Office where at least one of
the applicants is either a national or resident of the United States of
America. The announcement appears in the Official Gazette at 1302 O.G.
1261 on January 17, 2006.

   The search fee of the Korean Intellectual Property Office was increased,
effective January 1, 2013, and was announced in the Official Gazette at
1385 O.G. 176, on December 25, 2012.

Australian Patent Office as Searching and Examining Authority

   The Australian Patent Office (IP Australia) may act as the ISA or the
IPEA for an international application filed with the United States
Receiving Office or the International Bureau (IB) as Receiving Office where
at least one of the applicants is either a national or resident of the
United States of America. The announcement appears in the Offical Gazette
at 1337 O.G. 265, on December 23, 2008. However, the use of IP Australia is
restricted. IP Australia will not act as an ISA for applications with one
or more claims directed to the fields of business methods or mechanical
engineering or analogous fields of technology as defined by specified areas
of the International Patent Classification System, as indicated in the
Official Gazette at 1337 O.G. 261 on December 23, 2008, in Annex A to the
agreement between the USPTO and IP Australia. IP Australia will act as an
IPEA only if it also acted as the ISA.

   The search fee of IP Australia was decreased, effective September 1,
2013, and was announced in the Official Gazette at 1393 O.G. 170, on
August 27, 2013.

The Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents & Trademarks of
Russia as Searching and Examining Authority

 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 157 

   The Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents & Trademarks of
Russia (Rospatent) may act as the ISA or the IPEA for an international
application filed with the United States Receiving Office or the
International Bureau (IB) as Receiving Office where at least one of the
applicants is either a national or resident of the United States of
America. The announcement appears in the Official Gazette at 1378 O.G. 162,
on May 8, 2012.

   The search fee of Rospatent was increased, effective January 1, 2013,
and was announced in the Official Gazette at 1385 O.G. 176, on December 25,
2012.

Fees

   The fee for filing a request for the restoration of the right of
priority was changed, effective March 19, 2013, and was announced in the
Federal Register on January 18, 2013. The transmittal fee for the USPTO
was changed to include a basic portion and a non-electronic filing fee
portion, effective November 15, 2011, and was announced in the Federal
Register on November 15, 2011. Search fees for the USPTO were changed,
effective January 12, 2009, and were announced in the Federal Register on
November 12, 2008.

   International filing fees were increased, effective January 1, 2013,
and were announced in the Official Gazette at 1385 O.G. 176, on December 25,
2012.

   The schedule of PCT fees (in U.S. dollars), as of September 1, 2013, is
as follows:

International Application (PCT Chapter I) fees:

   Transmittal fee

     Basic Portion                                                  $240.00
      Non-electronic filing fee portion for international
       applications (other than plant applications) filed
       on or after 15 November 2011 other than by the
       Office electronic filing system
         - Other than a small or micro entity                       $400.00
         - Small Entity                                             $200.00
         - Micro Entity                                             $200.00

   Search fee

      U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) as
      International Searching Authority (ISA)
         - Search fee                                             $2,080.00
         - Supplemental search fee, per additional
            invention (payable only upon invitation)              $2,080.00
      European Patent Office as ISA                               $2,419.00
      Korean Intellectual Property Office as ISA                  $1,167.00
      IP Australia as ISA                                         $2,084.00
      Federal Service on Intellectual Property, Patents &
         Trademarks of Russia (Rospatent) as ISA                    $217.00

   International fees

      International filing fee                                    $1,419.00
      International filing fee-filed in paper
         with PCT EASY zip file or
         electronically without PCT EASY zip file                 $1,312.00
      International filing fee-filed
         electronically with PCT EASY zip files                   $1,206.00
      Supplemental fee for each page over 30                         $16.00

 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 158 

   Restoration of Priority

      Filing a request for the restoration of the
      right of priority under § 1.452
         - Other than a small or micro entity                      $1420.00
         - Small Entity                                             $710.00
         - Micro Entity                                             $355.00

   International Application (PCT Chapter II) fees associated
   with filing a Demand for Preliminary Examination:

      Handling fee                                                  $213.00
      Handling fee-90% reduction, if applicants meet criteria
      specified at:
        http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/fees/fee_reduction.pdf            $21.30
      Preliminary examination fee
         USPTO as International Preliminary
         Examining Authority (IPEA)
            - USPTO was ISA in PCT Chapter I                        $600.00
            - USPTO was not ISA in PCT Chapter I                    $750.00
            - Additional preliminary examination fee,
              per additional invention
              (payable only upon invitation)                        $600.00

   U.S. National Stage fees (for international applications entering
the U.S. national phase under 35 U.S.C. 371) can be found on the USPTO's
Web site (www.uspto.gov).

October 1, 2013                                         ANDREW H. HIRSHFELD
                                                    Deputy Commissioner for
                                                  Patent Examination Policy
                                  United States Patent and Trademark Office
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 159 

Notice of Maintenance Fees Payable
                   Notice of Maintenance Fees Payable

   Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 1.362(d) provides
that maintenance fees may be paid without surcharge for the six-month
period beginning 3, 7, and 11 years after the date of issue of patents
based on applications filed on or after Dec. 12, 1980. An additional
six-month grace period is provided by 35 U.S.C. 41(b) and 37 CFR 1.362(e)
for payment of the maintenance fee with the surcharge set forth in 37 CFR
1.20(h), as amended effective Dec. 16, 1991. If the maintenance fee is
not paid in the patent requiring such payment the patent will expire on
the 4th, 8th, or 12th anniversary of the grant.

   Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on November 16, 2010
for which maintenance fees due at 3 years and six months may now be paid
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:

        Utility Patents 7,832,017 through 7,836,516
        Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.

   Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on November 14, 2006
for which maintenance fees due at 7 years and six months may now be paid
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:

        Utility Patents 7,134,146 through 7,137,145
        Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.

   Attention is drawn to the patents that were issued on November 12, 2002
for which maintenance fees due at 11 years and six months may now be paid.
The patents have patent numbers within the following ranges:

        Utility Patents 6,477,709 through 6,481,013
        Reissue Patents based on the above identified patents.

   No maintenance fees are required for design or plant patents.

   Payments of maintenance fees in patents may be submitted electronically
over the Internet at www.uspto.gov. Click on the "Site Index" link at the
top of the homepage (www.uspto.gov), and then scroll down and click on the
"Maintenance Fees" link for more information.

   Payments of maintenance fees in patents not submitted electronically
over the Internet should be mailed to "United States Patent and Trademark
Office, P.O. Box 979070, St. Louis, MO 63197-9000".

   Correspondence related to maintenance fees other than payments of
maintenance fees in patents is not to be mailed to P.O. Box 979070,
St. Louis, MO 63197-9000, but must be mailed to "Mail Stop M
Correspondence, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O.
Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450".

   Patent owners must establish small entity status according to 37 CFR
1.27 if they have not done so and if they wish to pay the small entity
amount.

   The current amounts of the maintenance fees due at 3 years and six
months, 7 years and six months, and 11 years and six months are set forth
in the most recently amended provisions in 37 CFR 1.20(e)-(g). To obtain
the current maintenance fee amounts, please call the USPTO Contact Center
at (800)-786-9199 or see the current USPTO fee schedule posted on the USPTO
Internet web site. At the top of the USPTO homepage at www.uspto.gov, click
on the "Site Index" link and then scroll down and click on the "Fees,
USPTO" link to find the current USPTO fee schedule.
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 160 

Notice of Expiration of Patents Due to Failure to Pay Maintenance Fee
                        Notice of Expiration of Patents
                     Due to Failure to Pay Maintenance Fee

   35 U.S.C. 41 and 37 CFR 1.362(g) provide that if the required
maintenance fee and any applicable surcharge are not paid in a patent
requiring such payment, the patent will expire at the end of the 4th, 8th
or 12th anniversary of the grant of the patent depending on the first
maintenance fee which was not paid.
   According to the records of the Office, the patents listed below have
expired due to failure to pay the required maintenance fee and any
applicable surcharge.

                   PATENTS WHICH EXPIRED ON October 9, 2013
                    DUE TO FAILURE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES

Patent                          Application                         Issue
Number                             Number                            Date

6,298,492                       09/656,920                       10/09/01
6,298,495                       09/438,916                       10/09/01
6,298,496                       09/551,856                       10/09/01
6,298,500                       09/713,370                       10/09/01
6,298,506                       09/532,074                       10/09/01
6,298,509                       08/971,100                       10/09/01
6,298,512                       09/558,808                       10/09/01
6,298,526                       09/383,873                       10/09/01
6,298,532                       09/356,925                       10/09/01
6,298,545                       09/459,140                       10/09/01
6,298,546                       09/374,166                       10/09/01
6,298,547                       09/158,536                       10/09/01
6,298,548                       08/974,934                       10/09/01
6,298,552                       09/502,559                       10/09/01
6,298,554                       09/542,738                       10/09/01
6,298,557                       09/141,436                       10/09/01
6,298,560                       09/533,967                       10/09/01
6,298,566                       09/192,237                       10/09/01
6,298,576                       09/646,267                       10/09/01
6,298,578                       09/689,355                       10/09/01
6,298,589                       09/624,943                       10/09/01
6,298,595                       09/324,220                       10/09/01
6,298,596                       09/364,066                       10/09/01
6,298,601                       09/549,646                       10/09/01
6,298,602                       09/615,562                       10/09/01
6,298,603                       09/437,693                       10/09/01
6,298,610                       09/725,920                       10/09/01
6,298,614                       09/437,541                       10/09/01
6,298,632                       09/020,748                       10/09/01
6,298,642                       09/662,762                       10/09/01
6,298,644                       09/394,509                       10/09/01
6,298,658                       09/451,898                       10/09/01
6,298,660                       09/553,197                       10/09/01
6,298,667                       09/599,788                       10/09/01
6,298,682                       09/554,052                       10/09/01
6,298,683                       09/622,061                       10/09/01
6,298,687                       09/496,215                       10/09/01
6,298,693                       09/501,137                       10/09/01
6,298,696                       09/772,181                       10/09/01
6,298,708                       09/447,695                       10/09/01
6,298,714                       09/461,770                       10/09/01
6,298,721                       09/390,615                       10/09/01
6,298,726                       09/329,024                       10/09/01
6,298,744                       09/531,757                       10/09/01
6,298,754                       09/426,026                       10/09/01
6,298,763                       09/234,773                       10/09/01
6,298,767                       09/505,036                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 161 

6,298,770                       09/638,675                       10/09/01
6,298,776                       09/720,855                       10/09/01
6,298,778                       09/432,222                       10/09/01
6,298,786                       09/388,902                       10/09/01
6,298,795                       09/380,815                       10/09/01
6,298,801                       09/565,938                       10/09/01
6,298,802                       09/495,462                       10/09/01
6,298,804                       09/476,839                       10/09/01
6,298,814                       09/756,633                       10/09/01
6,298,820                       09/702,526                       10/09/01
6,298,822                       09/539,253                       10/09/01
6,298,835                       09/580,455                       10/09/01
6,298,839                       09/564,283                       10/09/01
6,298,842                       09/478,921                       10/09/01
6,298,847                       09/210,214                       10/09/01
6,298,849                       09/417,580                       10/09/01
6,298,850                       09/368,751                       10/09/01
6,298,860                       09/396,583                       10/09/01
6,298,862                       09/663,023                       10/09/01
6,298,866                       09/546,695                       10/09/01
6,298,872                       09/452,754                       10/09/01
6,298,892                       09/469,254                       10/09/01
6,298,901                       09/345,488                       10/09/01
6,298,904                       09/179,535                       10/09/01
6,298,908                       08/847,111                       10/09/01
6,298,909                       09/515,989                       10/09/01
6,298,910                       09/668,935                       10/09/01
6,298,914                       09/448,572                       10/09/01
6,298,917                       09/128,531                       10/09/01
6,298,921                       09/447,382                       10/09/01
6,298,923                       09/380,991                       10/09/01
6,298,933                       09/416,513                       10/09/01
6,298,936                       09/506,495                       10/09/01
6,298,944                       09/006,137                       10/09/01
6,298,960                       09/580,859                       10/09/01
6,298,961                       09/792,727                       10/09/01
6,298,967                       09/492,532                       10/09/01
6,298,990                       09/656,319                       10/09/01
6,298,992                       09/656,231                       10/09/01
6,298,995                       09/441,796                       10/09/01
6,298,996                       09/496,557                       10/09/01
6,298,999                       09/654,575                       10/09/01
6,299,009                       09/593,085                       10/09/01
6,299,013                       09/516,466                       10/09/01
6,299,017                       09/380,512                       10/09/01
6,299,019                       09/564,728                       10/09/01
6,299,024                       09/609,779                       10/09/01
6,299,026                       09/536,593                       10/09/01
6,299,034                       09/424,111                       10/09/01
6,299,036                       09/777,810                       10/09/01
6,299,042                       09/546,284                       10/09/01
6,299,049                       09/366,817                       10/09/01
6,299,050                       09/512,472                       10/09/01
6,299,057                       09/244,702                       10/09/01
6,299,059                       09/764,255                       10/09/01
6,299,061                       09/473,087                       10/09/01
6,299,067                       09/626,841                       10/09/01
6,299,074                       09/203,709                       10/09/01
6,299,086                       09/553,834                       10/09/01
6,299,091                       09/481,634                       10/09/01
6,299,098                       09/455,313                       10/09/01
6,299,100                       09/221,484                       10/09/01
6,299,104                       09/631,541                       10/09/01
6,299,111                       09/186,625                       10/09/01
6,299,116                       09/413,364                       10/09/01
6,299,117                       09/410,050                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 162 

6,299,119                       09/470,308                       10/09/01
6,299,129                       09/459,028                       10/09/01
6,299,130                       09/418,288                       10/09/01
6,299,134                       09/462,278                       10/09/01
6,299,136                       09/313,569                       10/09/01
6,299,142                       09/406,191                       10/09/01
6,299,144                       09/519,787                       10/09/01
6,299,148                       09/378,726                       10/09/01
6,299,155                       09/274,965                       10/09/01
6,299,159                       09/468,184                       10/09/01
6,299,162                       09/611,637                       10/09/01
6,299,185                       09/697,782                       10/09/01
6,299,199                       09/398,975                       10/09/01
6,299,204                       09/136,081                       10/09/01
6,299,205                       09/526,099                       10/09/01
6,299,206                       09/617,882                       10/09/01
6,299,208                       09/312,606                       10/09/01
6,299,215                       09/630,922                       10/09/01
6,299,220                       09/155,870                       10/09/01
6,299,221                       09/458,661                       10/09/01
6,299,225                       09/407,612                       10/09/01
6,299,226                       09/668,814                       10/09/01
6,299,234                       09/001,399                       10/09/01
6,299,238                       09/689,739                       10/09/01
6,299,243                       09/591,062                       10/09/01
6,299,246                       09/269,496                       10/09/01
6,299,247                       09/490,226                       10/09/01
6,299,250                       09/625,554                       10/09/01
6,299,253                       09/641,293                       10/09/01
6,299,256                       09/571,401                       10/09/01
6,299,261                       09/330,956                       10/09/01
6,299,266                       09/415,666                       10/09/01
6,299,267                       09/657,377                       10/09/01
6,299,275                       09/352,059                       10/09/01
6,299,277                       08/911,386                       10/09/01
6,299,279                       09/139,714                       10/09/01
6,299,281                       09/434,739                       10/09/01
6,299,284                       08/734,326                       10/09/01
6,299,286                       09/472,977                       10/09/01
6,299,289                       09/425,416                       10/09/01
6,299,290                       09/425,417                       10/09/01
6,299,297                       08/548,696                       10/09/01
6,299,298                       08/612,429                       10/09/01
6,299,299                       09/680,394                       10/09/01
6,299,301                       09/408,146                       10/09/01
6,299,302                       09/215,396                       10/09/01
6,299,312                       09/515,850                       10/09/01
6,299,315                       09/820,017                       10/09/01
6,299,320                       09/607,082                       10/09/01
6,299,323                       09/687,396                       10/09/01
6,299,333                       09/641,379                       10/09/01
6,299,335                       09/438,173                       10/09/01
6,299,344                       09/787,266                       10/09/01
6,299,351                       09/650,478                       10/09/01
6,299,355                       09/455,887                       10/09/01
6,299,361                       09/391,387                       10/09/01
6,299,362                       09/334,200                       10/09/01
6,299,366                       09/327,455                       10/09/01
6,299,367                       09/288,170                       10/09/01
6,299,379                       09/157,130                       10/09/01
6,299,382                       08/709,981                       10/09/01
6,299,392                       09/309,162                       10/09/01
6,299,397                       09/598,277                       10/09/01
6,299,406                       09/523,818                       10/09/01
6,299,432                       09/318,706                       10/09/01
6,299,441                       09/609,277                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 163 

6,299,444                       09/617,859                       10/09/01
6,299,456                       09/058,586                       10/09/01
6,299,459                       09/776,337                       10/09/01
6,299,460                       09/549,983                       10/09/01
6,299,461                       09/296,859                       10/09/01
6,299,463                       09/652,407                       10/09/01
6,299,484                       09/728,531                       10/09/01
6,299,499                       09/609,492                       10/09/01
6,299,500                       09/633,554                       10/09/01
6,299,509                       09/766,099                       10/09/01
6,299,510                       09/069,223                       10/09/01
6,299,517                       09/533,916                       10/09/01
6,299,530                       09/072,837                       10/09/01
6,299,533                       09/243,353                       10/09/01
6,299,534                       08/998,473                       10/09/01
6,299,540                       09/344,776                       10/09/01
6,299,544                       09/455,897                       10/09/01
6,299,550                       09/040,797                       10/09/01
6,299,567                       08/725,529                       10/09/01
6,299,570                       09/422,671                       10/09/01
6,299,573                       09/369,572                       10/09/01
6,299,576                       09/248,268                       10/09/01
6,299,577                       09/256,233                       10/09/01
6,299,584                       09/285,938                       10/09/01
6,299,588                       09/211,652                       10/09/01
6,299,597                       08/978,190                       10/09/01
6,299,600                       09/743,031                       10/09/01
6,299,609                       09/333,827                       10/09/01
6,299,610                       09/003,772                       10/09/01
6,299,612                       09/363,839                       10/09/01
6,299,615                       09/375,306                       10/09/01
6,299,618                       09/503,195                       10/09/01
6,299,626                       09/445,138                       10/09/01
6,299,636                       09/056,081                       10/09/01
6,299,637                       09/378,386                       10/09/01
6,299,647                       09/537,660                       10/09/01
6,299,652                       09/568,005                       10/09/01
6,299,662                       09/485,462                       10/09/01
6,299,665                       09/347,871                       10/09/01
6,299,671                       09/486,897                       10/09/01
6,299,672                       09/419,224                       10/09/01
6,299,673                       09/221,026                       10/09/01
6,299,677                       09/202,937                       10/09/01
6,299,679                       09/395,499                       10/09/01
6,299,686                       09/113,002                       10/09/01
6,299,687                       09/631,956                       10/09/01
6,299,693                       09/213,751                       10/09/01
6,299,696                       09/735,150                       10/09/01
6,299,704                       09/384,285                       10/09/01
6,299,709                       09/575,019                       10/09/01
6,299,712                       09/411,532                       10/09/01
6,299,713                       09/354,642                       10/09/01
6,299,714                       09/106,289                       10/09/01
6,299,715                       09/115,024                       10/09/01
6,299,721                       09/211,283                       10/09/01
6,299,725                       09/680,638                       10/09/01
6,299,731                       09/401,951                       10/09/01
6,299,741                       09/450,858                       10/09/01
6,299,746                       09/218,941                       10/09/01
6,299,753                       09/387,941                       10/09/01
6,299,756                       09/486,015                       10/09/01
6,299,763                       09/289,308                       10/09/01
6,299,766                       09/610,505                       10/09/01
6,299,774                       09/602,684                       10/09/01
6,299,776                       08/996,380                       10/09/01
6,299,780                       09/467,565                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 164 

6,299,786                       09/113,129                       10/09/01
6,299,787                       09/180,086                       10/09/01
6,299,789                       09/744,981                       10/09/01
6,299,795                       09/484,242                       10/09/01
6,299,805                       09/341,449                       10/09/01
6,299,807                       09/370,268                       10/09/01
6,299,809                       08/815,744                       10/09/01
6,299,812                       09/374,775                       10/09/01
6,299,815                       09/640,253                       10/09/01
6,299,817                       09/001,334                       10/09/01
6,299,826                       09/445,253                       10/09/01
6,299,828                       09/657,269                       10/09/01
6,299,835                       08/273,742                       10/09/01
6,299,838                       08/726,170                       10/09/01
6,299,840                       09/281,223                       10/09/01
6,299,848                       09/160,376                       10/09/01
6,299,852                       09/217,586                       10/09/01
6,299,853                       09/417,484                       10/09/01
6,299,856                       09/497,568                       10/09/01
6,299,863                       09/535,200                       10/09/01
6,299,864                       09/575,682                       10/09/01
6,299,865                       09/561,657                       10/09/01
6,299,867                       09/230,387                       10/09/01
6,299,868                       09/353,329                       10/09/01
6,299,869                       09/202,122                       10/09/01
6,299,870                       09/246,447                       10/09/01
6,299,877                       09/206,935                       10/09/01
6,299,880                       09/366,575                       10/09/01
6,299,885                       09/254,877                       10/09/01
6,299,886                       09/462,990                       10/09/01
6,299,888                       09/147,747                       10/09/01
6,299,893                       09/550,604                       10/09/01
6,299,896                       09/548,515                       10/09/01
6,299,903                       09/251,597                       10/09/01
6,299,912                       09/556,460                       10/09/01
6,299,914                       09/430,926                       10/09/01
6,299,915                       09/521,959                       10/09/01
6,299,923                       09/021,741                       10/09/01
6,299,931                       09/289,425                       10/09/01
6,299,940                       09/109,774                       10/09/01
6,299,947                       09/234,448                       10/09/01
6,299,953                       08/064,145                       10/09/01
6,299,955                       09/566,554                       10/09/01
6,299,960                       09/141,498                       10/09/01
6,299,969                       09/221,075                       10/09/01
6,299,977                       09/297,293                       10/09/01
6,299,984                       09/390,970                       10/09/01
6,299,986                       09/193,737                       10/09/01
6,299,987                       08/870,883                       10/09/01
6,300,001                       09/341,938                       10/09/01
6,300,009                       09/468,203                       10/09/01
6,300,017                       09/137,504                       10/09/01
6,300,018                       09/399,884                       10/09/01
6,300,019                       09/417,692                       10/09/01
6,300,021                       09/333,235                       10/09/01
6,300,028                       09/048,149                       10/09/01
6,300,036                       09/203,669                       10/09/01
6,300,043                       09/200,742                       10/09/01
6,300,062                       08/732,749                       10/09/01
6,300,073                       09/411,351                       10/09/01
6,300,074                       09/412,017                       10/09/01
6,300,078                       09/693,642                       10/09/01
6,300,079                       08/680,855                       10/09/01
6,300,084                       09/414,828                       10/09/01
6,300,086                       09/083,516                       10/09/01
6,300,092                       09/448,076                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 165 

6,300,118                       08/479,703                       10/09/01
6,300,127                       09/124,238                       10/09/01
6,300,134                       09/502,711                       10/09/01
6,300,137                       09/300,873                       10/09/01
6,300,143                       09/259,347                       10/09/01
6,300,178                       09/179,318                       10/09/01
6,300,181                       09/358,075                       10/09/01
6,300,184                       09/609,158                       10/09/01
6,300,188                       09/334,583                       10/09/01
6,300,190                       09/452,389                       10/09/01
6,300,193                       09/145,721                       10/09/01
6,300,199                       09/579,281                       10/09/01
6,300,204                       09/310,043                       10/09/01
6,300,209                       09/599,640                       10/09/01
6,300,213                       09/189,030                       10/09/01
6,300,214                       09/415,394                       10/09/01
6,300,218                       09/567,095                       10/09/01
6,300,219                       09/385,915                       10/09/01
6,300,226                       09/244,302                       10/09/01
6,300,243                       09/483,839                       10/09/01
6,300,245                       09/460,265                       10/09/01
6,300,253                       09/057,155                       10/09/01
6,300,265                       09/604,700                       10/09/01
6,300,276                       09/242,727                       10/09/01
6,300,284                       09/394,089                       10/09/01
6,300,285                       08/814,306                       10/09/01
6,300,309                       08/243,520                       10/09/01
6,300,310                       08/849,764                       10/09/01
6,300,313                       09/401,851                       10/09/01
6,300,315                       09/385,238                       10/09/01
6,300,321                       09/424,380                       10/09/01
6,300,326                       09/631,165                       10/09/01
6,300,327                       08/795,967                       10/09/01
6,300,328                       09/627,914                       10/09/01
6,300,330                       09/297,768                       10/09/01
6,300,346                       09/520,667                       10/09/01
6,300,347                       09/446,885                       10/09/01
6,300,350                       09/691,967                       10/09/01
6,300,354                       09/744,405                       10/09/01
6,300,357                       09/241,369                       10/09/01
6,300,365                       09/850,901                       10/09/01
6,300,393                       09/593,596                       10/09/01
6,300,400                       09/061,653                       10/09/01
6,300,418                       09/432,068                       10/09/01
6,300,420                       08/817,210                       10/09/01
6,300,427                       09/477,104                       10/09/01
6,300,434                       08/524,024                       10/09/01
6,300,440                       09/565,137                       10/09/01
6,300,442                       09/396,000                       10/09/01
6,300,459                       09/403,862                       10/09/01
6,300,466                       09/554,157                       10/09/01
6,300,469                       09/646,762                       10/09/01
6,300,473                       09/343,011                       10/09/01
6,300,474                       08/489,071                       10/09/01
6,300,475                       09/206,936                       10/09/01
6,300,478                       09/325,958                       10/09/01
6,300,479                       09/369,744                       10/09/01
6,300,480                       09/310,851                       10/09/01
6,300,486                       09/196,567                       10/09/01
6,300,489                       09/442,631                       10/09/01
6,300,492                       09/617,053                       10/09/01
6,300,494                       08/926,010                       10/09/01
6,300,499                       09/155,535                       10/09/01
6,300,503                       09/589,571                       10/09/01
6,300,504                       09/218,847                       10/09/01
6,300,522                       09/673,509                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 166 

6,300,523                       09/427,761                       10/09/01
6,300,531                       08/435,178                       10/09/01
6,300,536                       09/436,485                       10/09/01
6,300,564                       09/554,054                       10/09/01
6,300,570                       09/754,202                       10/09/01
6,300,576                       09/106,302                       10/09/01
6,300,584                       09/469,518                       10/09/01
6,300,587                       09/604,915                       10/09/01
6,300,592                       09/360,496                       10/09/01
6,300,594                       09/252,223                       10/09/01
6,300,601                       09/624,334                       10/09/01
6,300,603                       09/588,919                       10/09/01
6,300,613                       09/315,571                       10/09/01
6,300,614                       09/050,014                       10/09/01
6,300,618                       09/209,580                       10/09/01
6,300,640                       09/197,248                       10/09/01
6,300,642                       09/250,425                       10/09/01
6,300,645                       09/382,939                       10/09/01
6,300,646                       09/558,337                       10/09/01
6,300,668                       09/375,852                       10/09/01
6,300,671                       09/376,886                       10/09/01
6,300,675                       09/495,301                       10/09/01
6,300,681                       09/313,196                       10/09/01
6,300,685                       09/358,366                       10/09/01
6,300,702                       09/664,591                       10/09/01
6,300,703                       09/380,492                       10/09/01
6,300,712                       09/253,825                       10/09/01
6,300,713                       09/653,819                       10/09/01
6,300,714                       09/616,732                       10/09/01
6,300,719                       09/640,432                       10/09/01
6,300,720                       09/283,135                       10/09/01
6,300,723                       09/652,937                       10/09/01
6,300,725                       09/161,995                       10/09/01
6,300,726                       09/482,093                       10/09/01
6,300,730                       09/284,381                       10/09/01
6,300,733                       09/790,136                       10/09/01
6,300,735                       09/532,852                       10/09/01
6,300,746                       09/269,432                       10/09/01
6,300,753                       09/511,814                       10/09/01
6,300,754                       09/511,817                       10/09/01
6,300,756                       08/873,819                       10/09/01
6,300,771                       09/197,674                       10/09/01
6,300,773                       09/424,529                       10/09/01
6,300,778                       09/392,084                       10/09/01
6,300,782                       09/872,434                       10/09/01
6,300,786                       09/420,256                       10/09/01
6,300,787                       09/561,723                       10/09/01
6,300,793                       09/377,304                       10/09/01
6,300,798                       09/418,762                       10/09/01
6,300,801                       09/404,142                       10/09/01
6,300,806                       09/448,049                       10/09/01
6,300,812                       09/672,340                       10/09/01
6,300,820                       09/498,699                       10/09/01
6,300,821                       09/444,990                       10/09/01
6,300,840                       09/457,679                       10/09/01
6,300,842                       09/501,738                       10/09/01
6,300,848                       09/388,414                       10/09/01
6,300,849                       09/449,582                       10/09/01
6,300,851                       09/445,707                       10/09/01
6,300,856                       09/379,607                       10/09/01
6,300,861                       09/407,150                       10/09/01
6,300,865                       09/180,564                       10/09/01
6,300,871                       09/421,974                       10/09/01
6,300,891                       09/266,601                       10/09/01
6,300,895                       08/800,627                       10/09/01
6,300,896                       09/465,595                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 167 

6,300,898                       09/480,957                       10/09/01
6,300,907                       09/491,294                       10/09/01
6,300,910                       09/400,578                       10/09/01
6,300,913                       09/461,578                       10/09/01
6,300,915                       09/709,136                       10/09/01
6,300,919                       09/578,133                       10/09/01
6,300,921                       08/968,384                       10/09/01
6,300,932                       09/141,203                       10/09/01
6,300,939                       09/175,632                       10/09/01
6,300,941                       09/325,001                       10/09/01
6,300,944                       08/928,888                       10/09/01
6,300,945                       09/183,913                       10/09/01
6,300,950                       09/054,025                       10/09/01
6,300,954                       09/151,062                       10/09/01
6,300,972                       08/995,477                       10/09/01
6,300,975                       09/173,093                       10/09/01
6,300,977                       08/930,749                       10/09/01
6,300,978                       09/022,038                       10/09/01
6,300,980                       08/803,185                       10/09/01
6,300,985                       09/523,889                       10/09/01
6,300,998                       09/372,929                       10/09/01
6,300,999                       09/420,173                       10/09/01
6,301,000                       09/480,426                       10/09/01
6,301,006                       09/500,171                       10/09/01
6,301,007                       09/321,910                       10/09/01
6,301,008                       09/264,742                       10/09/01
6,301,015                       08/845,039                       10/09/01
6,301,021                       09/118,976                       10/09/01
6,301,026                       09/442,804                       10/09/01
6,301,033                       08/872,973                       10/09/01
6,301,039                       09/660,865                       10/09/01
6,301,041                       09/376,180                       10/09/01
6,301,045                       09/239,031                       10/09/01
6,301,059                       09/479,143                       10/09/01
6,301,066                       09/162,225                       10/09/01
6,301,069                       09/162,860                       10/09/01
6,301,071                       09/811,839                       10/09/01
6,301,072                       09/603,156                       10/09/01
6,301,073                       09/442,931                       10/09/01
6,301,079                       09/116,377                       10/09/01
6,301,080                       09/251,918                       10/09/01
6,301,085                       09/337,425                       10/09/01
6,301,093                       09/478,521                       10/09/01
6,301,098                       09/167,581                       10/09/01
6,301,102                       09/406,956                       10/09/01
6,301,106                       09/179,241                       10/09/01
6,301,107                       09/537,032                       10/09/01
6,301,111                       09/712,928                       10/09/01
6,301,112                       09/506,110                       10/09/01
6,301,117                       09/548,363                       10/09/01
6,301,119                       09/230,718                       10/09/01
6,301,127                       09/639,528                       10/09/01
6,301,143                       09/645,552                       10/09/01
6,301,148                       09/542,629                       10/09/01
6,301,151                       09/634,180                       10/09/01
6,301,153                       09/511,915                       10/09/01
6,301,157                       09/415,024                       10/09/01
6,301,158                       09/079,912                       10/09/01
6,301,160                       09/498,168                       10/09/01
6,301,161                       09/558,432                       10/09/01
6,301,162                       09/619,352                       10/09/01
6,301,172                       09/794,513                       10/09/01
6,301,182                       09/532,874                       10/09/01
6,301,185                       09/603,895                       10/09/01
6,301,186                       09/845,383                       10/09/01
6,301,189                       09/604,686                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 168 

6,301,203                       09/414,469                       10/09/01
6,301,215                       09/347,095                       10/09/01
6,301,216                       09/291,179                       10/09/01
6,301,218                       09/398,740                       10/09/01
6,301,221                       09/138,599                       10/09/01
6,301,229                       09/056,281                       10/09/01
6,301,239                       08/991,822                       10/09/01
6,301,255                       08/995,995                       10/09/01
6,301,256                       09/064,676                       10/09/01
6,301,270                       09/032,866                       10/09/01
6,301,272                       09/505,000                       10/09/01
6,301,279                       09/430,643                       10/09/01
6,301,283                       09/237,890                       10/09/01
6,301,286                       09/679,367                       10/09/01
6,301,299                       09/087,225                       10/09/01
6,301,302                       09/628,341                       10/09/01
6,301,305                       09/089,393                       10/09/01
6,301,321                       09/354,068                       10/09/01
6,301,324                       09/282,535                       10/09/01
6,301,326                       09/184,629                       10/09/01
6,301,329                       09/633,242                       10/09/01
6,301,332                       09/723,932                       10/09/01
6,301,334                       09/552,141                       10/09/01
6,301,343                       09/130,481                       10/09/01
6,301,344                       09/186,009                       10/09/01
6,301,351                       09/056,769                       10/09/01
6,301,352                       09/173,142                       10/09/01
6,301,369                       09/758,404                       10/09/01
6,301,376                       09/061,406                       10/09/01
6,301,379                       08/807,090                       10/09/01
6,301,387                       09/216,692                       10/09/01
6,301,390                       08/714,500                       10/09/01
6,301,406                       09/214,202                       10/09/01
6,301,410                       09/876,208                       10/09/01
6,301,411                       09/175,538                       10/09/01
6,301,420                       09/070,747                       10/09/01
6,301,429                       09/073,681                       10/09/01
6,301,432                       08/973,998                       10/09/01
6,301,433                       09/482,505                       10/09/01
6,301,434                       09/274,815                       10/09/01
6,301,438                       09/661,236                       10/09/01
6,301,443                       08/901,480                       10/09/01
6,301,447                       09/168,174                       10/09/01
6,301,450                       09/662,906                       10/09/01
6,301,460                       09/667,358                       10/09/01
6,301,469                       09/294,948                       10/09/01
6,301,477                       09/054,324                       10/09/01
6,301,480                       08/924,583                       10/09/01
6,301,490                       09/097,209                       10/09/01
6,301,497                       09/351,495                       10/09/01
6,301,504                       09/415,480                       10/09/01
6,301,506                       09/345,117                       10/09/01
6,301,507                       09/487,788                       10/09/01
6,301,509                       09/148,693                       10/09/01
6,301,512                       08/632,638                       10/09/01
6,301,517                       09/266,223                       10/09/01
6,301,520                       09/034,345                       10/09/01
6,301,528                       09/622,281                       10/09/01
6,301,530                       09/599,449                       10/09/01
6,301,532                       09/466,304                       10/09/01
6,301,548                       09/262,862                       10/09/01
6,301,557                       09/132,945                       10/09/01
6,301,558                       09/005,963                       10/09/01
6,301,559                       09/192,197                       10/09/01
6,301,577                       09/668,718                       10/09/01
6,301,603                       09/024,793                       10/09/01
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 169 

6,301,608                       08/696,548                       10/09/01
6,301,623                       09/220,430                       10/09/01
6,301,639                       09/360,261                       10/09/01
6,301,649                       09/055,186                       10/09/01
6,301,655                       09/153,756                       10/09/01
6,301,663                       09/195,918                       10/09/01
6,301,673                       08/787,891                       10/09/01
6,301,686                       09/274,475                       10/09/01
6,301,692                       09/153,063                       10/09/01
6,301,702                       09/018,857                       10/09/01
6,301,707                       08/942,265                       10/09/01
6,301,708                       09/191,257                       10/09/01

                   PATENTS WHICH EXPIRED ON October 4, 2013
                    DUE TO FAILURE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES

Patent                          Application                         Issue
Number                             Number                            Date

6,951,037                       10/226,337                       10/04/05
6,951,038                       10/959,882                       10/04/05
6,951,040                       10/433,222                       10/04/05
6,951,051                       10/101,334                       10/04/05
6,951,055                       10/877,901                       10/04/05
6,951,058                       10/961,995                       10/04/05
6,951,069                       09/706,436                       10/04/05
6,951,073                       10/700,262                       10/04/05
6,951,074                       10/603,525                       10/04/05
6,951,085                       10/769,938                       10/04/05
6,951,087                       10/317,291                       10/04/05
6,951,089                       10/248,672                       10/04/05
6,951,095                       10/718,019                       10/04/05
6,951,111                       10/679,583                       10/04/05
6,951,115                       10/659,753                       10/04/05
6,951,118                       10/669,172                       10/04/05
6,951,121                       10/059,313                       10/04/05
6,951,128                       10/433,810                       10/04/05
6,951,139                       10/729,600                       10/04/05
6,951,144                       10/811,619                       10/04/05
6,951,155                       10/335,771                       10/04/05
6,951,159                       10/244,776                       10/04/05
6,951,162                       09/544,357                       10/04/05
6,951,168                       10/837,332                       10/04/05
6,951,173                       10/437,476                       10/04/05
6,951,177                       10/510,010                       10/04/05
6,951,178                       10/616,595                       10/04/05
6,951,179                       10/911,746                       10/04/05
6,951,180                       10/793,151                       10/04/05
6,951,183                       10/859,713                       10/04/05
6,951,185                       10/688,620                       10/04/05
6,951,186                       09/774,626                       10/04/05
6,951,188                       10/827,033                       10/04/05
6,951,190                       10/372,489                       10/04/05
6,951,192                       10/615,650                       10/04/05
6,951,195                       10/701,616                       10/04/05
6,951,207                       10/819,311                       10/04/05
6,951,211                       10/385,588                       10/04/05
6,951,213                       09/927,106                       10/04/05
6,951,216                       10/325,534                       10/04/05
6,951,222                       10/115,296                       10/04/05
6,951,224                       10/465,052                       10/04/05
6,951,236                       10/959,445                       10/04/05
6,951,256                       10/831,666                       10/04/05
6,951,258                       10/799,496                       10/04/05
6,951,261                       10/259,656                       10/04/05
6,951,262                       10/099,226                       10/04/05
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 170 

6,951,268                       10/071,146                       10/04/05
6,951,272                       10/941,836                       10/04/05
6,951,275                       10/499,009                       10/04/05
6,951,277                       10/131,313                       10/04/05
6,951,278                       10/380,943                       10/04/05
6,951,285                       10/623,007                       10/04/05
6,951,299                       10/260,392                       10/04/05
6,951,304                       10/227,545                       10/04/05
6,951,308                       10/415,792                       10/04/05
6,951,311                       10/653,137                       10/04/05
6,951,318                       10/614,507                       10/04/05
6,951,325                       10/782,139                       10/04/05
6,951,327                       10/403,375                       10/04/05
6,951,330                       10/467,132                       10/04/05
6,951,333                       10/404,067                       10/04/05
6,951,335                       10/282,574                       10/04/05
6,951,341                       09/980,898                       10/04/05
6,951,342                       10/622,269                       10/04/05
6,951,344                       10/329,706                       10/04/05
6,951,345                       10/740,106                       10/04/05
6,951,348                       10/280,613                       10/04/05
6,951,361                       11/018,307                       10/04/05
6,951,362                       10/707,428                       10/04/05
6,951,365                       10/413,004                       10/04/05
6,951,367                       10/855,766                       10/04/05
6,951,374                       10/223,523                       10/04/05
6,951,375                       10/441,713                       10/04/05
6,951,377                       10/202,981                       10/04/05
6,951,379                       10/411,048                       10/04/05
6,951,383                       10/600,736                       10/04/05
6,951,389                       10/349,410                       10/04/05
6,951,391                       10/462,294                       10/04/05
6,951,392                       10/615,663                       10/04/05
6,951,399                       10/425,942                       10/04/05
6,951,406                       10/422,230                       10/04/05
6,951,407                       10/851,463                       10/04/05
6,951,408                       10/249,905                       10/04/05
6,951,419                       10/433,563                       10/04/05
6,951,420                       09/857,735                       10/04/05
6,951,421                       10/367,450                       10/04/05
6,951,427                       10/804,072                       10/04/05
6,951,428                       10/702,959                       10/04/05
6,951,432                       10/779,307                       10/04/05
6,951,435                       10/949,234                       10/04/05
6,951,437                       10/783,074                       10/04/05
6,951,459                       10/156,968                       10/04/05
6,951,464                       10/113,727                       10/04/05
6,951,465                       10/603,047                       10/04/05
6,951,466                       10/653,400                       10/04/05
6,951,469                       10/884,942                       10/04/05
6,951,477                       10/624,620                       10/04/05
6,951,489                       10/731,111                       10/04/05
6,951,490                       10/621,728                       10/04/05
6,951,499                       10/839,530                       10/04/05
6,951,503                       10/879,654                       10/04/05
6,951,505                       10/704,517                       10/04/05
6,951,517                       10/488,152                       10/04/05
6,951,541                       10/726,833                       10/04/05
6,951,552                       10/239,531                       10/04/05
6,951,572                       10/639,255                       10/04/05
6,951,584                       10/364,517                       10/04/05
6,951,589                       10/181,661                       10/04/05
6,951,599                       10/188,163                       10/04/05
6,951,601                       08/838,910                       10/04/05
6,951,603                       10/225,054                       10/04/05
6,951,610                       10/059,577                       10/04/05
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 171 

6,951,616                       10/643,828                       10/04/05
6,951,618                       10/420,161                       10/04/05
6,951,621                       10/247,754                       10/04/05
6,951,626                       10/086,692                       10/04/05
6,951,634                       10/247,016                       10/04/05
6,951,636                       10/793,880                       10/04/05
6,951,637                       10/433,257                       10/04/05
6,951,639                       10/118,430                       10/04/05
6,951,640                       10/375,454                       10/04/05
6,951,646                       09/744,176                       10/04/05
6,951,662                       09/762,347                       10/04/05
6,951,663                       10/643,013                       10/04/05
6,951,665                       10/706,051                       10/04/05
6,951,671                       09/839,793                       10/04/05
6,951,676                       10/381,167                       10/04/05
6,951,679                       10/697,212                       10/04/05
6,951,681                       10/734,872                       10/04/05
6,951,687                       10/465,781                       10/04/05
6,951,700                       10/148,673                       10/04/05
6,951,706                       10/646,710                       10/04/05
6,951,714                       10/053,243                       10/04/05
6,951,716                       10/163,966                       10/04/05
6,951,717                       08/484,741                       10/04/05
6,951,722                       09/935,338                       10/04/05
6,951,726                       10/252,357                       10/04/05
6,951,740                       10/396,869                       10/04/05
6,951,747                       10/914,242                       10/04/05
6,951,749                       09/712,338                       10/04/05
6,951,751                       10/439,479                       10/04/05
6,951,753                       10/253,598                       10/04/05
6,951,777                       10/837,959                       10/04/05
6,951,778                       10/284,825                       10/04/05
6,951,779                       10/912,469                       10/04/05
6,951,786                       09/951,324                       10/04/05
6,951,789                       10/878,059                       10/04/05
6,951,794                       10/798,568                       10/04/05
6,951,795                       10/744,048                       10/04/05
6,951,796                       10/653,950                       10/04/05
6,951,797                       10/111,138                       10/04/05
6,951,813                       10/406,854                       10/04/05
6,951,815                       10/466,604                       10/04/05
6,951,833                       10/663,101                       10/04/05
6,951,837                       09/979,531                       10/04/05
6,951,841                       09/738,212                       10/04/05
6,951,843                       10/168,540                       10/04/05
6,951,845                       10/146,717                       10/04/05
6,951,855                       10/475,051                       10/04/05
6,951,856                       10/332,247                       10/04/05
6,951,865                       10/148,836                       10/04/05
6,951,866                       10/222,922                       10/04/05
6,951,870                       10/312,817                       10/04/05
6,951,871                       10/600,674                       10/04/05
6,951,874                       10/204,754                       10/04/05
6,951,877                       10/624,659                       10/04/05
6,951,879                       09/999,424                       10/04/05
6,951,881                       10/434,965                       10/04/05
6,951,883                       10/466,118                       10/04/05
6,951,884                       10/456,641                       10/04/05
6,951,892                       09/755,239                       10/04/05
6,951,898                       10/016,334                       10/04/05
6,951,899                       10/384,373                       10/04/05
6,951,903                       10/242,992                       10/04/05
6,951,904                       09/600,363                       10/04/05
6,951,905                       10/182,333                       10/04/05
6,951,907                       10/412,409                       10/04/05
6,951,908                       10/433,404                       10/04/05
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 172 

6,951,926                       09/866,927                       10/04/05
6,951,930                       10/227,001                       10/04/05
6,951,932                       10/281,291                       10/04/05
6,951,940                       10/663,124                       10/04/05
6,951,943                       10/620,396                       10/04/05
6,951,945                       10/616,359                       10/04/05
6,951,947                       09/839,577                       10/04/05
6,951,954                       09/503,599                       10/04/05
6,951,955                       10/664,724                       10/04/05
6,951,958                       10/049,669                       10/04/05
6,951,959                       10/731,733                       10/04/05
6,951,986                       11/025,303                       10/04/05
6,952,000                       10/901,522                       10/04/05
6,952,001                       10/444,936                       10/04/05
6,952,002                       10/195,402                       10/04/05
6,952,007                       10/090,929                       10/04/05
6,952,029                       09/633,132                       10/04/05
6,952,044                       10/161,423                       10/04/05
6,952,045                       10/348,536                       10/04/05
6,952,046                       10/460,852                       10/04/05
6,952,051                       09/627,649                       10/04/05
6,952,058                       10/883,214                       10/04/05
6,952,072                       10/281,021                       10/04/05
6,952,075                       10/810,637                       10/04/05
6,952,085                       10/751,155                       10/04/05
6,952,090                       10/722,506                       10/04/05
6,952,099                       10/678,903                       10/04/05
6,952,104                       10/461,875                       10/04/05
6,952,105                       10/620,702                       10/04/05
6,952,109                       10/933,788                       10/04/05
6,952,122                       09/966,481                       10/04/05
6,952,131                       10/912,436                       10/04/05
6,952,140                       10/334,945                       10/04/05
6,952,141                       10/618,448                       10/04/05
6,952,158                       10/004,449                       10/04/05
6,952,159                       10/296,905                       10/04/05
6,952,161                       10/423,509                       10/04/05
6,952,162                       10/625,058                       10/04/05
6,952,163                       10/460,509                       10/04/05
6,952,167                       10/344,375                       10/04/05
6,952,170                       10/054,996                       10/04/05
6,952,173                       10/107,069                       10/04/05
6,952,174                       10/237,992                       10/04/05
6,952,187                       10/731,196                       10/04/05
6,952,197                       09/559,261                       10/04/05
6,952,200                       10/705,013                       10/04/05
6,952,207                       10/096,217                       10/04/05
6,952,209                       09/894,251                       10/04/05
6,952,215                       09/283,386                       10/04/05
6,952,231                       09/675,548                       10/04/05
6,952,233                       08/848,243                       10/04/05
6,952,244                       10/081,917                       10/04/05
6,952,248                       10/425,613                       10/04/05
6,952,263                       10/453,374                       10/04/05
6,952,266                       10/342,578                       10/04/05
6,952,269                       10/253,762                       10/04/05
6,952,288                       09/923,416                       10/04/05
6,952,289                       09/744,746                       10/04/05
6,952,294                       09/725,934                       10/04/05
6,952,296                       09/786,837                       10/04/05
6,952,311                       10/847,444                       10/04/05
6,952,315                       10/734,302                       10/04/05
6,952,327                       08/944,208                       10/04/05
6,952,348                       10/816,134                       10/04/05
6,952,366                       10/775,424                       10/04/05
6,952,370                       10/749,428                       10/04/05
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 173 

6,952,372                       10/944,052                       10/04/05
6,952,373                       10/941,996                       10/04/05
6,952,377                       10/824,784                       10/04/05
6,952,379                       10/250,849                       10/04/05
6,952,382                       10/115,404                       10/04/05
6,952,386                       09/613,997                       10/04/05
6,952,390                       10/879,917                       10/04/05
6,952,404                       10/287,766                       10/04/05
6,952,417                       09/524,476                       10/04/05
6,952,420                       09/691,756                       10/04/05
6,952,422                       09/850,107                       10/04/05
6,952,438                       10/699,134                       10/04/05
6,952,446                       10/008,476                       10/04/05
6,952,456                       09/599,969                       10/04/05
6,952,459                       09/981,980                       10/04/05
6,952,474                       09/808,853                       10/04/05
6,952,482                       10/007,460                       10/04/05
6,952,491                       09/765,995                       10/04/05
6,952,493                       09/773,478                       10/04/05
6,952,512                       10/471,924                       10/04/05
6,952,532                       09/833,107                       10/04/05
6,952,544                       10/670,246                       10/04/05
6,952,545                       10/438,868                       10/04/05
6,952,547                       10/937,273                       10/04/05
6,952,555                       10/435,872                       10/04/05
6,952,567                       10/672,903                       10/04/05
6,952,586                       09/725,128                       10/04/05
6,952,594                       10/301,987                       10/04/05
6,952,598                       09/810,462                       10/04/05
6,952,600                       10/150,624                       10/04/05
6,952,603                       09/810,635                       10/04/05
6,952,605                       09/924,869                       10/04/05
6,952,624                       10/463,529                       10/04/05
6,952,634                       10/214,762                       10/04/05
6,952,646                       10/438,302                       10/04/05
6,952,647                       10/922,947                       10/04/05
6,952,654                       10/662,637                       10/04/05
6,952,663                       09/883,402                       10/04/05
6,952,671                       09/649,143                       10/04/05
6,952,686                       09/926,148                       10/04/05
6,952,688                       09/588,681                       10/04/05
6,952,701                       09/924,735                       10/04/05
6,952,726                       09/384,839                       10/04/05
6,952,729                       09/851,234                       10/04/05
6,952,742                       10/787,116                       10/04/05
6,952,744                       10/688,749                       10/04/05
6,952,747                       10/314,285                       10/04/05
6,952,752                       10/683,066                       10/04/05
6,952,756                       10/140,138                       10/04/05
6,952,757                       10/230,936                       10/04/05
6,952,764                       10/039,588                       10/04/05
6,952,765                       10/046,982                       10/04/05
6,952,766                       09/809,408                       10/04/05
6,952,767                       09/983,908                       10/04/05
6,952,775                       09/644,065                       10/04/05
6,952,780                       09/769,778                       10/04/05
6,952,786                       10/128,984                       10/04/05
6,952,787                       10/772,352                       10/04/05
6,952,798                       09/811,219                       10/04/05
6,952,804                       09/783,569                       10/04/05
6,952,825                       09/484,117                       10/04/05
6,952,829                       09/106,166                       10/04/05
6,952,831                       09/258,623                       10/04/05
6,952,832                       10/080,799                       10/04/05
6,952,834                       10/204,269                       10/04/05
6,952,835                       09/644,351                       10/04/05
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 174 


                   PATENTS WHICH EXPIRED ON October 6, 2013
                    DUE TO FAILURE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES

Patent                          Application                         Issue
Number                             Number                            Date

7,596,814                       11/487,758                       10/06/09
7,596,815                       11/796,642                       10/06/09
7,596,817                       11/208,179                       10/06/09
7,596,827                       10/985,231                       10/06/09
7,596,830                       11/896,779                       10/06/09
7,596,859                       10/278,250                       10/06/09
7,596,862                       11/863,820                       10/06/09
7,596,875                       11/938,840                       10/06/09
7,596,877                       11/985,278                       10/06/09
7,596,878                       12/235,990                       10/06/09
7,596,881                       12/233,198                       10/06/09
7,596,887                       11/235,594                       10/06/09
7,596,888                       12/316,418                       10/06/09
7,596,895                       11/799,094                       10/06/09
7,596,906                       11/238,526                       10/06/09
7,596,918                       10/493,311                       10/06/09
7,596,922                       10/685,048                       10/06/09
7,596,923                       10/956,422                       10/06/09
7,596,927                       11/128,007                       10/06/09
7,596,939                       11/290,480                       10/06/09
7,596,942                       11/571,252                       10/06/09
7,596,960                       10/959,145                       10/06/09
7,596,961                       10/521,959                       10/06/09
7,596,964                       11/482,040                       10/06/09
7,596,966                       11/228,044                       10/06/09
7,596,967                       11/585,777                       10/06/09
7,596,970                       11/424,837                       10/06/09
7,596,978                       12/082,434                       10/06/09
7,596,982                       12/216,315                       10/06/09
7,596,985                       12/139,732                       10/06/09
7,596,999                       11/450,165                       10/06/09
7,597,005                       11/557,661                       10/06/09
7,597,013                       11/522,686                       10/06/09
7,597,019                       11/502,422                       10/06/09
7,597,039                       11/753,913                       10/06/09
7,597,048                       10/583,548                       10/06/09
7,597,062                       11/150,056                       10/06/09
7,597,064                       11/743,281                       10/06/09
7,597,071                       12/136,243                       10/06/09
7,597,073                       11/882,106                       10/06/09
7,597,088                       11/467,128                       10/06/09
7,597,091                       12/213,064                       10/06/09
7,597,096                       12/031,904                       10/06/09
7,597,097                       12/031,921                       10/06/09
7,597,098                       10/521,241                       10/06/09
7,597,099                       11/851,108                       10/06/09
7,597,107                       11/442,442                       10/06/09
7,597,109                       11/360,417                       10/06/09
7,597,113                       12/346,677                       10/06/09
7,597,116                       11/279,150                       10/06/09
7,597,130                       11/206,119                       10/06/09
7,597,145                       11/167,673                       10/06/09
7,597,174                       11/708,140                       10/06/09
7,597,179                       11/621,995                       10/06/09
7,597,183                       11/932,224                       10/06/09
7,597,187                       12/055,340                       10/06/09
7,597,192                       11/179,613                       10/06/09
7,597,193                       11/189,499                       10/06/09
7,597,194                       11/435,311                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 175 

7,597,197                       12/024,121                       10/06/09
7,597,198                       11/350,362                       10/06/09
7,597,200                       10/182,435                       10/06/09
7,597,201                       11/671,670                       10/06/09
7,597,205                       11/535,527                       10/06/09
7,597,207                       10/587,232                       10/06/09
7,597,215                       11/433,851                       10/06/09
7,597,216                       10/550,551                       10/06/09
7,597,222                       11/126,669                       10/06/09
7,597,223                       10/980,385                       10/06/09
7,597,232                       11/513,219                       10/06/09
7,597,237                       11/409,895                       10/06/09
7,597,238                       11/553,761                       10/06/09
7,597,239                       11/646,819                       10/06/09
7,597,241                       11/377,923                       10/06/09
7,597,250                       11/420,747                       10/06/09
7,597,252                       11/279,829                       10/06/09
7,597,268                       11/829,766                       10/06/09
7,597,271                       11/149,535                       10/06/09
7,597,274                       11/982,154                       10/06/09
7,597,277                       10/582,786                       10/06/09
7,597,292                       11/339,064                       10/06/09
7,597,294                       10/545,320                       10/06/09
7,597,296                       10/802,640                       10/06/09
7,597,297                       11/786,730                       10/06/09
7,597,309                       12/199,527                       10/06/09
7,597,314                       11/970,993                       10/06/09
7,597,317                       11/723,275                       10/06/09
7,597,325                       11/550,604                       10/06/09
7,597,327                       11/292,934                       10/06/09
7,597,330                       12/029,235                       10/06/09
7,597,338                       11/213,272                       10/06/09
7,597,345                       11/949,326                       10/06/09
7,597,349                       11/459,960                       10/06/09
7,597,354                       11/260,824                       10/06/09
7,597,358                       12/119,835                       10/06/09
7,597,369                       11/753,581                       10/06/09
7,597,372                       10/535,932                       10/06/09
7,597,376                       11/817,970                       10/06/09
7,597,377                       12/139,052                       10/06/09
7,597,380                       12/248,531                       10/06/09
7,597,386                       12/042,024                       10/06/09
7,597,392                       12/177,710                       10/06/09
7,597,421                       11/748,485                       10/06/09
7,597,435                       12/031,646                       10/06/09
7,597,440                       12/015,802                       10/06/09
7,597,447                       10/891,715                       10/06/09
7,597,448                       11/459,211                       10/06/09
7,597,449                       12/130,730                       10/06/09
7,597,454                       11/714,207                       10/06/09
7,597,457                       11/683,205                       10/06/09
7,597,461                       11/749,173                       10/06/09
7,597,462                       11/691,483                       10/06/09
7,597,473                       11/680,727                       10/06/09
7,597,474                       12/064,386                       10/06/09
7,597,481                       11/569,388                       10/06/09
7,597,491                       11/245,347                       10/06/09
7,597,494                       11/999,137                       10/06/09
7,597,496                       11/435,193                       10/06/09
7,597,500                       12/158,560                       10/06/09
7,597,513                       11/724,779                       10/06/09
7,597,518                       11/870,803                       10/06/09
7,597,520                       11/311,558                       10/06/09
7,597,523                       11/774,750                       10/06/09
7,597,524                       11/590,292                       10/06/09
7,597,526                       11/222,559                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 176 

7,597,529                       10/568,613                       10/06/09
7,597,532                       11/429,268                       10/06/09
7,597,545                       10/532,684                       10/06/09
7,597,554                       11/598,897                       10/06/09
7,597,564                       11/696,433                       10/06/09
7,597,575                       11/520,114                       10/06/09
7,597,576                       11/900,558                       10/06/09
7,597,577                       12/180,154                       10/06/09
7,597,585                       12/150,410                       10/06/09
7,597,586                       12/076,605                       10/06/09
7,597,591                       12/369,788                       10/06/09
7,597,600                       11/933,751                       10/06/09
7,597,601                       11/136,174                       10/06/09
7,597,604                       11/783,139                       10/06/09
7,597,605                       11/701,297                       10/06/09
7,597,607                       11/403,308                       10/06/09
7,597,624                       11/164,769                       10/06/09
7,597,629                       11/399,369                       10/06/09
7,597,632                       11/152,306                       10/06/09
7,597,635                       11/703,356                       10/06/09
7,597,637                       11/619,943                       10/06/09
7,597,638                       10/711,193                       10/06/09
7,597,641                       11/645,170                       10/06/09
7,597,645                       11/704,876                       10/06/09
7,597,665                       10/663,084                       10/06/09
7,597,680                       11/883,934                       10/06/09
7,597,691                       10/257,956                       10/06/09
7,597,703                       10/935,851                       10/06/09
7,597,716                       11/658,378                       10/06/09
7,597,727                       11/105,205                       10/06/09
7,597,728                       10/151,797                       10/06/09
7,597,738                       11/687,256                       10/06/09
7,597,754                       11/471,570                       10/06/09
7,597,759                       11/353,819                       10/06/09
7,597,761                       11/502,647                       10/06/09
7,597,775                       10/012,919                       10/06/09
7,597,797                       11/650,820                       10/06/09
7,597,804                       10/876,777                       10/06/09
7,597,815                       11/189,363                       10/06/09
7,597,817                       10/829,590                       10/06/09
7,597,834                       11/733,638                       10/06/09
7,597,843                       11/212,644                       10/06/09
7,597,844                       10/892,812                       10/06/09
7,597,845                       10/923,975                       10/06/09
7,597,862                       11/533,592                       10/06/09
7,597,868                       11/649,715                       10/06/09
7,597,885                       10/810,518                       10/06/09
7,597,898                       10/435,953                       10/06/09
7,597,903                       10/307,501                       10/06/09
7,597,904                       11/739,368                       10/06/09
7,597,906                       11/688,167                       10/06/09
7,597,910                       11/207,700                       10/06/09
7,597,918                       11/103,624                       10/06/09
7,597,928                       10/789,504                       10/06/09
7,597,940                       10/522,185                       10/06/09
7,597,941                       10/937,738                       10/06/09
7,597,952                       11/446,546                       10/06/09
7,597,960                       12/213,740                       10/06/09
7,597,968                       11/271,236                       10/06/09
7,597,971                       11/218,892                       10/06/09
7,597,979                       11/160,207                       10/06/09
7,597,982                       10/668,161                       10/06/09
7,597,988                       11/027,534                       10/06/09
7,598,000                       11/031,949                       10/06/09
7,598,002                       11/328,759                       10/06/09
7,598,009                       12/182,347                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 177 

7,598,010                       10/998,913                       10/06/09
7,598,019                       10/934,102                       10/06/09
7,598,020                       11/117,492                       10/06/09
7,598,024                       11/370,159                       10/06/09
7,598,036                       11/157,922                       10/06/09
7,598,042                       10/514,735                       10/06/09
7,598,044                       11/397,347                       10/06/09
7,598,049                       10/993,813                       10/06/09
7,598,061                       11/724,596                       10/06/09
7,598,082                       09/980,772                       10/06/09
7,598,085                       11/303,759                       10/06/09
7,598,098                       10/553,470                       10/06/09
7,598,101                       11/906,869                       10/06/09
7,598,106                       11/111,995                       10/06/09
7,598,110                       11/844,694                       10/06/09
7,598,120                       12/114,544                       10/06/09
7,598,137                       11/319,492                       10/06/09
7,598,138                       11/315,100                       10/06/09
7,598,140                       11/237,688                       10/06/09
7,598,148                       10/966,222                       10/06/09
7,598,168                       11/033,208                       10/06/09
7,598,197                       11/050,574                       10/06/09
7,598,198                       12/183,247                       10/06/09
7,598,199                       11/126,064                       10/06/09
7,598,201                       12/086,319                       10/06/09
7,598,203                       11/623,782                       10/06/09
7,598,206                       11/793,899                       10/06/09
7,598,219                       11/361,906                       10/06/09
7,598,228                       10/642,272                       10/06/09
7,598,229                       10/695,578                       10/06/09
7,598,230                       11/818,990                       10/06/09
7,598,235                       11/218,468                       10/06/09
7,598,237                       11/946,408                       10/06/09
7,598,240                       10/598,516                       10/06/09
7,598,243                       10/260,008                       10/06/09
7,598,251                       12/262,290                       10/06/09
7,598,252                       10/718,280                       10/06/09
7,598,256                       11/340,481                       10/06/09
7,598,258                       10/510,961                       10/06/09
7,598,259                       11/301,672                       10/06/09
7,598,260                       11/819,307                       10/06/09
7,598,261                       11/393,133                       10/06/09
7,598,263                       11/765,813                       10/06/09
7,598,266                       12/099,929                       10/06/09
7,598,267                       11/568,930                       10/06/09
7,598,269                       11/807,759                       10/06/09
7,598,284                       11/979,036                       10/06/09
7,598,286                       11/260,127                       10/06/09
7,598,288                       10/488,496                       10/06/09
7,598,293                       11/674,465                       10/06/09
7,598,300                       12/006,139                       10/06/09
7,598,307                       10/556,719                       10/06/09
7,598,331                       11/355,667                       10/06/09
7,598,337                       11/314,337                       10/06/09
7,598,340                       10/292,541                       10/06/09
7,598,349                       11/185,859                       10/06/09
7,598,351                       11/004,336                       10/06/09
7,598,352                       10/006,760                       10/06/09
7,598,355                       10/210,333                       10/06/09
7,598,356                       10/887,106                       10/06/09
7,598,357                       12/289,417                       10/06/09
7,598,367                       11/408,791                       10/06/09
7,598,368                       11/495,883                       10/06/09
7,598,382                       11/275,553                       10/06/09
7,598,387                       11/568,610                       10/06/09
7,598,392                       11/736,770                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 178 

7,598,393                       11/266,107                       10/06/09
7,598,396                       12/378,876                       10/06/09
7,598,399                       11/605,648                       10/06/09
7,598,401                       11/865,338                       10/06/09
7,598,408                       10/546,150                       10/06/09
7,598,411                       10/509,340                       10/06/09
7,598,418                       10/510,242                       10/06/09
7,598,422                       11/787,962                       10/06/09
7,598,425                       11/578,523                       10/06/09
7,598,428                       11/251,881                       10/06/09
7,598,433                       12/211,146                       10/06/09
7,598,444                       12/016,194                       10/06/09
7,598,493                       11/441,889                       10/06/09
7,598,502                       11/964,483                       10/06/09
7,598,537                       10/676,071                       10/06/09
7,598,553                       11/948,783                       10/06/09
7,598,554                       11/583,037                       10/06/09
7,598,563                       11/319,912                       10/06/09
7,598,568                       11/808,457                       10/06/09
7,598,572                       11/552,673                       10/06/09
7,598,578                       11/390,475                       10/06/09
7,598,583                       11/782,144                       10/06/09
7,598,593                       10/561,438                       10/06/09
7,598,614                       11/279,019                       10/06/09
7,598,616                       12/140,352                       10/06/09
7,598,624                       12/257,585                       10/06/09
7,598,637                       11/801,898                       10/06/09
7,598,640                       11/985,546                       10/06/09
7,598,643                       10/556,861                       10/06/09
7,598,673                       11/322,507                       10/06/09
7,598,674                       11/445,478                       10/06/09
7,598,677                       11/105,091                       10/06/09
7,598,678                       11/460,103                       10/06/09
7,598,695                       11/579,448                       10/06/09
7,598,697                       11/821,896                       10/06/09
7,598,699                       10/783,682                       10/06/09
7,598,722                       11/589,846                       10/06/09
7,598,729                       11/764,855                       10/06/09
7,598,735                       11/256,198                       10/06/09
7,598,745                       10/586,460                       10/06/09
7,598,748                       10/620,597                       10/06/09
7,598,758                       11/752,942                       10/06/09
7,598,761                       11/896,851                       10/06/09
7,598,787                       11/471,121                       10/06/09
7,598,791                       11/564,603                       10/06/09
7,598,804                       12/022,774                       10/06/09
7,598,817                       11/645,786                       10/06/09
7,598,823                       11/715,504                       10/06/09
7,598,824                       11/599,541                       10/06/09
7,598,833                       12/182,228                       10/06/09
7,598,844                       11/750,058                       10/06/09
7,598,849                       11/931,152                       10/06/09
7,598,860                       11/935,438                       10/06/09
7,598,862                       11/955,703                       10/06/09
7,598,864                       11/138,103                       10/06/09
7,598,874                       11/685,237                       10/06/09
7,598,877                       11/442,889                       10/06/09
7,598,878                       10/497,169                       10/06/09
7,598,887                       11/640,243                       10/06/09
7,598,897                       11/955,666                       10/06/09
7,598,919                       11/446,974                       10/06/09
7,598,921                       10/593,714                       10/06/09
7,598,928                       11/014,659                       10/06/09
7,598,929                       10/900,342                       10/06/09
7,598,933                       11/296,535                       10/06/09
7,598,934                       11/269,713                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 179 

7,598,938                       10/301,680                       10/06/09
7,598,940                       11/334,394                       10/06/09
7,598,944                       11/309,697                       10/06/09
7,598,988                       11/114,101                       10/06/09
7,599,000                       11/332,333                       10/06/09
7,599,005                       11/177,027                       10/06/09
7,599,045                       12/037,857                       10/06/09
7,599,050                       10/576,486                       10/06/09
7,599,053                       11/730,416                       10/06/09
7,599,061                       11/188,226                       10/06/09
7,599,064                       11/714,904                       10/06/09
7,599,065                       11/523,555                       10/06/09
7,599,096                       10/652,728                       10/06/09
7,599,099                       11/419,551                       10/06/09
7,599,106                       10/992,218                       10/06/09
7,599,109                       11/652,706                       10/06/09
7,599,120                       11/217,305                       10/06/09
7,599,140                       11/439,158                       10/06/09
7,599,143                       11/504,589                       10/06/09
7,599,145                       12/034,814                       10/06/09
7,599,146                       11/161,590                       10/06/09
7,599,149                       11/434,056                       10/06/09
7,599,150                       11/208,570                       10/06/09
7,599,162                       11/580,891                       10/06/09
7,599,179                       11/309,147                       10/06/09
7,599,186                       11/944,500                       10/06/09
7,599,188                       11/692,207                       10/06/09
7,599,208                       11/717,048                       10/06/09
7,599,213                       11/414,893                       10/06/09
7,599,233                       11/646,325                       10/06/09
7,599,239                       10/770,150                       10/06/09
7,599,242                       11/524,023                       10/06/09
7,599,243                       11/528,339                       10/06/09
7,599,249                       10/623,904                       10/06/09
7,599,253                       12/221,149                       10/06/09
7,599,263                       11/509,727                       10/06/09
7,599,267                       11/503,998                       10/06/09
7,599,270                       10/968,393                       10/06/09
7,599,272                       11/283,963                       10/06/09
7,599,290                       11/463,908                       10/06/09
7,599,318                       10/576,294                       10/06/09
7,599,324                       11/325,588                       10/06/09
7,599,345                       11/008,971                       10/06/09
7,599,355                       10/917,814                       10/06/09
7,599,356                       10/978,706                       10/06/09
7,599,385                       11/451,189                       10/06/09
7,599,388                       11/392,971                       10/06/09
7,599,400                       11/218,430                       10/06/09
7,599,414                       11/628,414                       10/06/09
7,599,428                       11/452,964                       10/06/09
7,599,443                       10/940,060                       10/06/09
7,599,446                       10/661,602                       10/06/09
7,599,458                       10/968,735                       10/06/09
7,599,465                       11/692,086                       10/06/09
7,599,512                       10/542,329                       10/06/09
7,599,513                       10/908,053                       10/06/09
7,599,517                       11/337,806                       10/06/09
7,599,528                       12/111,962                       10/06/09
7,599,547                       11/289,907                       10/06/09
7,599,551                       10/538,942                       10/06/09
7,599,552                       10/736,498                       10/06/09
7,599,555                       11/092,376                       10/06/09
7,599,564                       10/548,439                       10/06/09
7,599,567                       11/965,995                       10/06/09
7,599,573                       10/546,724                       10/06/09
7,599,574                       10/844,483                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 180 

7,599,575                       11/409,836                       10/06/09
7,599,584                       11/543,333                       10/06/09
7,599,586                       11/921,159                       10/06/09
7,599,594                       11/452,568                       10/06/09
7,599,595                       10/574,513                       10/06/09
7,599,601                       11/320,347                       10/06/09
7,599,607                       10/431,028                       10/06/09
7,599,608                       10/496,070                       10/06/09
7,599,614                       11/378,728                       10/06/09
7,599,625                       11/362,911                       10/06/09
7,599,631                       11/123,917                       10/06/09
7,599,651                       11/676,558                       10/06/09
7,599,666                       11/367,448                       10/06/09
7,599,667                       10/790,709                       10/06/09
7,599,670                       11/186,085                       10/06/09
7,599,682                       11/347,314                       10/06/09
7,599,689                       10/126,623                       10/06/09
7,599,705                       09/940,401                       10/06/09
7,599,708                       11/005,082                       10/06/09
7,599,720                       11/088,198                       10/06/09
7,599,724                       11/390,202                       10/06/09
7,599,735                       11/316,374                       10/06/09
7,599,736                       10/198,871                       10/06/09
7,599,738                       11/130,671                       10/06/09
7,599,770                       11/300,524                       10/06/09
7,599,781                       11/892,698                       10/06/09
7,599,791                       11/587,970                       10/06/09
7,599,799                       10/273,489                       10/06/09
7,599,804                       10/543,844                       10/06/09
7,599,806                       11/276,885                       10/06/09
7,599,809                       11/651,510                       10/06/09
7,599,814                       11/413,925                       10/06/09
7,599,815                       11/368,911                       10/06/09
7,599,819                       11/624,438                       10/06/09
7,599,827                       11/277,279                       10/06/09
7,599,828                       11/069,070                       10/06/09
7,599,831                       11/271,202                       10/06/09
7,599,832                       11/363,807                       10/06/09
7,599,853                       10/718,660                       10/06/09
7,599,870                       10/120,795                       10/06/09
7,599,871                       10/336,363                       10/06/09
7,599,884                       10/145,636                       10/06/09
7,599,887                       09/943,554                       10/06/09
7,599,891                       10/394,214                       10/06/09
7,599,906                       10/573,476                       10/06/09
7,599,915                       11/041,681                       10/06/09
7,599,921                       11/681,333                       10/06/09
7,599,925                       11/094,924                       10/06/09
7,599,926                       11/441,147                       10/06/09
7,599,933                       11/154,542                       10/06/09
7,599,944                       11/305,423                       10/06/09
7,599,953                       10/998,761                       10/06/09
7,599,957                       11/354,758                       10/06/09
7,599,962                       10/987,122                       10/06/09
7,599,989                       11/042,320                       10/06/09
7,599,991                       10/798,743                       10/06/09
7,600,000                       11/218,871                       10/06/09
7,600,022                       10/842,441                       10/06/09
7,600,024                       11/396,191                       10/06/09
7,600,029                       10/098,689                       10/06/09
7,600,033                       10/535,123                       10/06/09
7,600,045                       10/530,927                       10/06/09
7,600,051                       10/865,286                       10/06/09
7,600,055                       11/324,436                       10/06/09
7,600,076                       11/377,506                       10/06/09
7,600,091                       11/951,735                       10/06/09
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 181 

7,600,099                       11/683,843                       10/06/09
7,600,101                       11/034,464                       10/06/09
7,600,106                       11/309,458                       10/06/09
7,600,114                       10/184,746                       10/06/09
7,600,121                       10/938,608                       10/06/09
7,600,138                       11/269,337                       10/06/09
7,600,140                       11/778,404                       10/06/09
7,600,185                       10/807,983                       10/06/09
7,600,188                       11/453,151                       10/06/09
7,600,195                       11/285,492                       10/06/09
7,600,201                       10/820,979                       10/06/09
7,600,231                       11/510,970                       10/06/09
7,600,233                       10/896,456                       10/06/09
7,600,237                       11/108,682                       10/06/09
7,600,243                       11/392,259                       10/06/09
7,600,253                       12/196,165                       10/06/09
7,600,254                       12/061,714                       10/06/09
7,600,267                       11/153,708                       10/06/09
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 182 

Erratum
                                    Erratum

   In the notice of "PATENTS WHICH EXPIRED ON September 28, 2012 DUE
TO FAILURE TO PAY MAINTENANCE FEES" appearing in the Official Gazette of
November 20, 2012, all reference to Patent No. 6,798,842 which issued from
Application No. 09/756,723 should be deleted since the relevant maintenance
fee was timely paid in that patent.
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 183 

Patents Reinstated Due to the Acceptance of a Late Maintenance Fee from 10/28/2013
                 Patents Reinstated Due to the Acceptance of a
                     Late Maintenance Fee from 10/28/2013

Patent         Application     Filing          Issue           Granted
Number         Number          Date            Date            Date

6,008,446      09/095,519      06/10/1998      12/28/1999      10/28/2013
6,010,110      09/128,813      08/04/1998      01/04/2000      10/30/2013
6,026,388      08/696,702      08/14/1996      02/15/2000      10/29/2013
6,076,088      08/795,658      02/06/1997      06/13/2000      10/29/2013
6,234,788      09/433,859      11/04/1999      05/22/2001      10/29/2013
6,250,511      09/434,452      11/05/1999      06/26/2001      10/31/2013
6,258,023      09/376,538      08/18/1999      07/10/2001      11/01/2013
6,267,330      09/260,857      03/01/1999      07/31/2001      10/29/2013
6,272,431      09/067,789      04/28/1998      08/07/2001      10/29/2013
6,612,726      10/071,360      02/08/2002      09/02/2003      10/31/2013
6,648,973      10/277,843      10/22/2002      11/18/2003      10/31/2013
6,743,371      10/149,000      06/06/2002      06/01/2004      10/31/2013
6,809,450      10/729,580      12/04/2003      10/26/2004      10/31/2013
6,854,365      10/089,629      03/28/2002      02/15/2005      10/30/2013
6,869,480      10/198,668      07/17/2002      03/22/2005      10/29/2013
6,869,799      09/607,535      06/29/2000      03/22/2005      10/31/2013
7,295,311      11/000,399      12/01/2004      11/13/2007      11/01/2013
7,333,094      11/691,510      03/27/2007      02/19/2008      10/29/2013
7,382,104      11/247,393      10/11/2005      06/03/2008      10/29/2013
7,427,207      11/494,377      07/27/2006      09/23/2008      10/29/2013
7,437,976      11/515,644      09/05/2006      10/21/2008      10/29/2013
7,440,427      12/046,509      03/12/2008      10/21/2008      10/29/2013
7,496,463      11/518,874      09/12/2006      02/24/2009      11/01/2013
7,556,847      11/606,851      11/30/2006      07/07/2009      10/31/2013
7,566,876      11/513,415      08/31/2006      07/28/2009      10/29/2013
7,581,302      11/034,648      01/13/2005      09/01/2009      10/28/2013
7,590,162      11/481,475      07/06/2006      09/15/2009      10/28/2013
7,604,626      10/876,147      06/24/2004      10/20/2009      10/31/2013
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 184 

Reissue Applications Filed
                           Reissue Applications Filed

   Notice under 37 CFR 1.11(b). The reissue applications listed below
are open to public inspection by the general public through the Image
File Wrapper (IFW) system (http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair)
on the USPTO internet web site (www.uspto.gov), and copies may be obtained
by paying the fee therefor (37 CFR 1.19).

   D. 671,670, Re. S.N. 29/464,296, Aug. 15, 2013, Cl. D26/000,
LIGHTING FIXTURE WITH MULTIPLE SUPPORTS, Robert Sonneman, Owner of Record:
CONTEMPORARY VISIONS, L.L.C., Attorney or Agent: Joshua R. Matthews,
Ex. Gp.: 2913

   6,111,876, Re. S.N.: 13,728,846, Dec. 27, 2012, CL: 370, Vlan Frame
Format, Paul James Frantz, et. al, Owner of Record: Rockstar Consortium
LP US, Attorney or Agent: Boris A. Matvenko, Ex. GP.:2465

   6,570,889, Re. S.N. 13/952,971, Jul. 29, 2013, Cl./Sub 370/479,
TRANSMITTER AND TRANSMITTING METHOD INCREASING THE FLEXIBILITY OF CODE
ASSIGNMENT, Richard Stirling-Gallacher, et al., Owner of Record: Sony
Deutschland GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany, Attorney or Agent: William S.
Frommer, Ex. Gp: 2661

   6,614,771, Re. S.N. 13/406,781, Feb. 28, 2012, Cl./Sub 370/335,
APPARATUS FOR MAKING A RANDOM ACCESS TO THE REVERSE COMMON CHANNEL OF
A BASE STATION IN CDMA AND METHOD THEREFOR, Tae Joong Kim, et al.,
Owner of Record: Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute,
Daejon, Korea, Attorney or Agent: Yisun Song, Ex. Gp: 2664

   7,138,756, Re. S.N. 14/417,146, Mar. 09, 2012, Cl./Sub 313/467,
PHOSPOR FOR ELECTRON BEAM EXCITATION AND COLOR DISPLAY DEVICE USING THE
SAME, Masahiro Gotoh, et al., Owner of Record: Dowa Electronics Materials
Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan, Nichia Corporation, Tokushima, Japan, Attorney or
Agent: Chase J. Brill, Ex. Gp: 2879

   7,394,706, Re. S.N.: 13,899,036, May 21, 2013, CL: 257, SEMICONDUCTOR
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE, Masashi Horiguchi, et al, Owner of Record:
Renesas Electronic Corporation, Attorney or Agent: Gregory E. Montone,
Ex. GP.: 2811

   7,440,501, Re. S.N. 13/954,817, Jul. 30, 2013, Cl. 375/240,
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CONTROLLING LOOP FILTERING OR POST FILTERING IN
BLOCK BASED MOTION COMPENSATIONED VIDEO CODING, Shijun Sun et. al.,
Owner of Record: SHARP KABUSHIKI KAISHA, Attorney or Agent: Michael R.
Cammarata, Ex. Gp.: 2483

   7,529,209, Re. S.N. 13/649,856, Oct. 11, 2012, Cl./Sub 370/334,
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MITIGATING FADING OF A SIGNAL AT A RADIO RECEIVER,
Ramesh Mantha, et al., Owner of Record: Wi-Lan, Inc., Ottawa, Canada,
Attorney or Agent: Richard E. Campbell, Ex. Gp: 2617

   7,614,398, Re. S.N. 13/944,960, Aug. 23, 2013, Cl. 128/000,
HUMIDIFIER WITH STRUCTURE TO PREVENT BACKFLOW OF LIQUID THROUGH THE
HUMIDIFIER INLET, Alexander Virr et. al., Owner of Record: RESMED LIMITED,
Attorney or Agent: Paul T. Browen, Ex. Gp.: 3771

   7,787,179, Re. S.N. 13/932,475, Jul. 01, 2013, Cl. 359/000,
OPTICAL ARRANGEMENT FOR THE PRODUCTION OF A LIGHT-SHEET, Helmut Lippert
et. al., Owner of Record: CARL ZEISS MICROSCOPY GMBH, Attorney or Agent:
Eugene LeDonne, Ex. Gp.: 2873

   7,799,220, Re. S.N. 13/963,597, Aug. 09, 2013, Cl. 210/232,
HOT DISCONNECT REPLACEABLE WATER FILTER ASSEMBLY, Karl Fritze et. al,
Owner of Record: 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY, Attorney or Agent:
Karen M. Whitney, Ex. Gp.: 1778
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 185 


   7,922,341, Re. S.N. 13/973,783, Aug. 22, 2013, Cl./Sub 353/099,
PROJECTION OPTICAL SYSTEM, MAGNIFICATION PROJECTION OPTICAL SYSTEM,
MAGNIFICATION PROJECTION APPARATUS, AND IMAGE PROJECTION APPARATUS,
Atsushi Takaura, et al., Owner of Record: Ricoh Company, Ltd., Tokyo,
Japan, Attorney or Agent: James J. Kulbaski, Ex. Gp: 2878

   7,933,151, Re. S.N. 14,026,844, Sep. 13, 2013, Cl. 365, NON-VOLATILE
SEMICONDUCTOR STORAGE DEVICE EFFICIENCY, Takashi Maeda, et al, Owner of
Record: Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba, Minato-ku, Japan, Attorney or Agent:
Carl E. Schlier, Ex. Gp.: 2827

   7,933,560, Re. S.N.: 13,871,939, Apr. 26, 2013, CL: 341, APPARATUS AND
METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING/RECEIVING DATA IN A MOBILE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
USING MULTIPLE ANTENNAS, JIN-Kyu Han, et al., Owner of Record: Samsung
Electronics Co. Ld., Attorney or Agent: Wonki Park, Ex. GP.: 2819

   8,014,777, Re. S.N.: 14,031,932, Sep. 19, 2013, CL: 455, SYSTEM AND
METHOD FOR BUDGETED ZONE HEATING AND COOLING, Lawrence Kates, Owner of
Record: Nest Labs, Inc., Attorney or Agent: Andrew Van Court,
Ex. GP.: 2617

   8,016,624, Re. S.N. 13/965,494, Aug. 13, 2013, Cl. 439/000,
ELECTRIC CONTACT AND SOCKET FOR ELECTRICAL PART, Takahiro Oda et. al.,
Owner of Record: ENPLAS CORPORATION, Attorney or Agent: Paul I. Kravetz,
Ex. Gp.: 1784

   8,035,320, Re. S.N. 14/051,709, Oct. 11, 2013, Cl./Sub 315/292,
ILLUMINATION CONTROL NETWORK, W. Olin Sibert, Owner of Record: Cree, Inc.,
Durham, NC, Attorney or Agent: Anthony J. Josephson, Ex. Gp: 2821

   8,038,774, Re. S.N. 14/057,640, Oct. 18, 2013, Cl./Sub 095/210,
SHIP FLUE GAS DESULPHURIZATION METHOD AND EQUIPMENT, Sigan Peng, Owner of
Record: Sigan Peng, Attorney or Agent: Todd R. Tucker, Ex. Gp: 2626

   8,041,195, Re. S.N. 14/049,444, Oct. 09, 2013, Cl. 386/000,
VEHICLE ENTERTAINMENT SYSTEM FOR REMOTE SHARING AND STORAGE OF VIDEO
CONTENT, Christopher J. Vitito, Owner of Record: VOXX INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION, Attorney or Agent: Eric J. Strianese, Ex. Gp.: 2421

   8,108,222, Re. S.N. 14/057,478, Oct. 18, 2013, Cl./Sub 704/500,
ENCODING DEVICE AND DECODING DEVICE, Mineo Tsushima, et al., Owner of
Record: Panasonic Corporation, Osaka, Japan, Attorney or Agent:
Kenneth Fields, Ex. Gp: 2626

   8,203,459, Re. S.N. 14/050,051, Oct. 09, 2013, Cl. 340/000,
SECURITY SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTINUOUSLY MONITORING THE WEIGHT OF
A CONTAINER, David H. Jones et. al., Owner of Record: MJK HOLDINGS, LLC,
Attorney or Agent: Douglas R. Peterson, Ex. Gp.: 2612
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 186 

Requests for Ex Parte Reexamination Filed
                   Requests for Ex Parte Reexamination Filed

   6,089,713, Reexam. C.N. 90/012,983, Requested Date: Oct. 4, 2013,
Cl. 351/169, Title: SPECTACLE LENS WITH SPHERICAL FRONT SIDE AND MULTIFOCAL
BACK SIDE AND PROCESS FOR ITS PRODUCTION, Inventor: Albrecht Hof et al.,
Owners of Record: Carl Zeiss Vision International GMBH, Germany, Attorney
or Agent: Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, PC., Alexandria, VA, Ex. Gp.: 3992,
Requester: Alan T. Harrison, McCormick Paulding & Huber, LLP., Hartford, CT

   6,517,453, Reexam. C.N. 90/012,984, Requested Date: Sep. 10, 2013,
Cl. 473/578, Title: BOWFISHING ARROW ATTACHMENT, Inventor: Jack LaSee,
Owners of Record: AMS, LLC., Stanford, WI, Attorney or Agent: Boyle
Fredrickson, SC., Milwaukee, WI, Ex. Gp.: 3993, Requester: PATENT OWNER

   6,815,670, Reexam. C.N. 90/013,012, Requested Date: Oct. 2, 2013,
Cl. 250/286, Title: MATERIALS AND APPARATUS FOR THE DETECTION OF
CONTRABAND, Inventor: Anthony Jenkins et al., Owners of Record: Morpho
Detection, Inc., Newark, CA, Attorney or Agent: Armstrong Teasdale, LLP.,
St. Louis, MO, Ex. Gp.: 3992, Requester: Smiths Detection, Inc., Zaed M.
Billah, Kenyon & Kenyon, LLP., New York, NY

   6,902,754, Reexam. C.N 90/020,058, Requested Date: Oct. 4, 2013,
Cl. 425/503, Title: BLUNT EDGE DOUGH CUTTER, Inventor: James R. Evans
et al., Owners of Record: General Mills, Inc., Minneapolis, MN,
Attorney or Agent: General Mills, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, Ex. GP.: 3991,
Requester: FRITSCH GMBH, Germany, Kerry P. Sisselman, Lerner Greenberg
Stemer, LLP., Hollywood, FL

   7,261,770, Reexam. C.N. 90/013,011, Requested Date: Oct. 1, 2013,
Cl. 106/499, Title: COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS COMPRISING PIGMENTS AND
POLYPROTIC DISPERSING AGENTS, Inventor: Modasser El-Shoubary et al.,
Owners of Record: Cristal USA, Inc., Hunt Valley, MD, Attorney or Agent:
Greenberg Traurig, New York, NY, Ex. Gp.: 3991, Requester: PATENT OWNER

   8,078,134, Reexam. C.N. 90/012,988, Requested Date: Sep. 25, 2013,
Cl. 455/343, Title: MOBILE TERMINAL AND METHOD OF CONTROLLING OPERATION OF
THE MOBILE TERMINAL, Inventor: Rae Hoon Kang et al., Owners of Record:
LG Electronics, Inc., Korea, Attorney or Agent: Lee Hong Degerman Kang &
Waimey, Los Angeles, CA, Ex. Gp.: 3992, Requester: David L. McCombs,
Haynes & Boone, LLP., Dallas, TX
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 187 

Notice of Expiration of Trademark Registrations Due to Failure to Renew
                Notice of Expiration of Trademark Registrations
                            Due to Failure to Renew

   15 U.S.C. 1059 provides that each trademark registration may be
renewed for periods of ten years from the end of the expiring period
upon payment of the prescribed fee and the filing of an acceptable
application for renewal. This may be done at any time within one year
before the expiration of the period for which the registration was
issued or renewed, or it may be done within six months after such
expiration on payment of an additional fee.
   According to the records of the Office, the trademark registrations
listed below are expired due to failure to renew in accordance with 15
U.S.C. 1059.

                     TRADEMARK REGISTRATIONS WHICH EXPIRED
                               November 1, 2013
                            DUE TO FAILURE TO RENEW

Reg. Number                    Serial Number                      Reg. Date

2,699,598                       76/297,480                       03/25/2003
2,700,032                       76/398,501                       03/25/2003
3,223,164                       79/002,673                       03/27/2007
3,223,172                       79/006,743                       03/27/2007
3,223,177                       79/008,622                       03/27/2007
3,223,178                       79/009,870                       03/27/2007
3,223,179                       79/010,633                       03/27/2007
3,223,180                       79/010,797                       03/27/2007
3,223,181                       79/010,951                       03/27/2007
3,223,182                       79/011,230                       03/27/2007
3,223,184                       79/011,413                       03/27/2007
3,223,186                       79/011,963                       03/27/2007
3,223,189                       79/012,071                       03/27/2007
3,223,191                       79/012,239                       03/27/2007
3,223,193                       79/012,794                       03/27/2007
3,223,195                       79/013,221                       03/27/2007
3,223,197                       79/013,333                       03/27/2007
3,223,199                       79/013,592                       03/27/2007
3,223,201                       79/013,698                       03/27/2007
3,223,203                       79/013,945                       03/27/2007
3,223,204                       79/013,956                       03/27/2007
3,223,205                       79/014,128                       03/27/2007
3,223,207                       79/014,668                       03/27/2007
3,223,208                       79/014,707                       03/27/2007
3,223,209                       79/014,814                       03/27/2007
3,223,212                       79/015,545                       03/27/2007
3,223,213                       79/015,562                       03/27/2007
3,223,214                       79/015,695                       03/27/2007
3,223,215                       79/015,785                       03/27/2007
3,223,217                       79/015,956                       03/27/2007
3,223,218                       79/015,957                       03/27/2007
3,223,219                       79/015,958                       03/27/2007
3,223,220                       79/015,983                       03/27/2007
3,223,221                       79/016,040                       03/27/2007
3,223,222                       79/016,115                       03/27/2007
3,223,224                       79/016,229                       03/27/2007
3,223,226                       79/016,336                       03/27/2007
3,223,228                       79/016,496                       03/27/2007
3,223,230                       79/016,560                       03/27/2007
3,223,231                       79/016,674                       03/27/2007
3,223,234                       79/016,992                       03/27/2007
3,223,237                       79/017,150                       03/27/2007
3,223,238                       79/017,151                       03/27/2007
3,223,242                       79/017,450                       03/27/2007
3,223,244                       79/017,681                       03/27/2007
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 188 

3,223,247                       79/017,865                       03/27/2007
3,223,248                       79/017,952                       03/27/2007
3,223,249                       79/018,002                       03/27/2007
3,223,250                       79/018,035                       03/27/2007
3,223,251                       79/018,036                       03/27/2007
3,223,252                       79/018,056                       03/27/2007
3,223,253                       79/018,122                       03/27/2007
3,223,255                       79/018,293                       03/27/2007
3,223,257                       79/018,387                       03/27/2007
3,223,258                       79/018,463                       03/27/2007
3,223,259                       79/018,466                       03/27/2007
3,223,260                       79/018,506                       03/27/2007
3,223,261                       79/018,516                       03/27/2007
3,223,262                       79/018,531                       03/27/2007
3,223,263                       79/018,571                       03/27/2007
3,223,264                       79/018,604                       03/27/2007
3,223,265                       79/018,637                       03/27/2007
3,223,266                       79/018,648                       03/27/2007
3,223,268                       79/018,794                       03/27/2007
3,223,271                       79/018,975                       03/27/2007
3,223,274                       79/019,116                       03/27/2007
3,223,277                       79/019,236                       03/27/2007
3,194,613                       79/019,322                       01/02/2007
3,223,280                       79/019,425                       03/27/2007
3,223,283                       79/019,708                       03/27/2007
3,223,284                       79/019,737                       03/27/2007
3,223,286                       79/019,739                       03/27/2007
3,223,287                       79/019,794                       03/27/2007
3,223,292                       79/020,116                       03/27/2007
3,223,294                       79/020,145                       03/27/2007
3,223,295                       79/020,183                       03/27/2007
3,223,296                       79/020,220                       03/27/2007
3,223,301                       79/020,425                       03/27/2007
3,223,307                       79/020,732                       03/27/2007
3,223,308                       79/020,744                       03/27/2007
3,223,309                       79/020,785                       03/27/2007
3,223,313                       79/020,989                       03/27/2007
3,223,314                       79/020,999                       03/27/2007
3,223,315                       79/021,111                       03/27/2007
3,223,316                       79/021,174                       03/27/2007
3,223,319                       79/021,320                       03/27/2007
3,223,320                       79/021,322                       03/27/2007
3,223,321                       79/021,371                       03/27/2007
3,223,322                       79/021,372                       03/27/2007
3,223,324                       79/021,428                       03/27/2007
3,223,328                       79/021,597                       03/27/2007
3,223,329                       79/021,650                       03/27/2007
3,223,330                       79/021,727                       03/27/2007
3,223,331                       79/021,853                       03/27/2007
3,223,332                       79/021,854                       03/27/2007
3,223,333                       79/021,920                       03/27/2007
3,223,334                       79/022,008                       03/27/2007
3,223,335                       79/022,009                       03/27/2007
3,223,336                       79/022,018                       03/27/2007
3,223,337                       79/022,218                       03/27/2007
3,223,340                       79/022,397                       03/27/2007
3,223,342                       79/022,424                       03/27/2007
3,223,344                       79/022,623                       03/27/2007
3,223,345                       79/022,987                       03/27/2007
3,223,350                       79/023,488                       03/27/2007
3,223,351                       79/023,607                       03/27/2007
3,223,352                       79/023,745                       03/27/2007
3,223,354                       79/023,767                       03/27/2007
3,223,355                       79/023,775                       03/27/2007
3,223,358                       79/024,099                       03/27/2007
3,223,360                       79/024,219                       03/27/2007
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 189 

3,223,361                       79/024,296                       03/27/2007
3,223,364                       79/024,498                       03/27/2007
3,223,368                       79/025,016                       03/27/2007
3,223,369                       79/025,074                       03/27/2007
3,223,372                       79/025,386                       03/27/2007
3,223,374                       79/025,431                       03/27/2007
3,223,375                       79/025,461                       03/27/2007
3,223,376                       79/025,486                       03/27/2007
3,223,386                       79/027,139                       03/27/2007
3,223,387                       79/027,541                       03/27/2007
3,223,388                       79/027,566                       03/27/2007
3,223,392                       79/029,129                       03/27/2007
3,223,393                       79/029,223                       03/27/2007
1,232,486                       73/235,525                       03/29/1983
1,232,381                       73/277,359                       03/29/1983
1,761,544                       74/218,726                       03/30/1993
1,760,858                       74/225,543                       03/30/1993
1,761,631                       74/225,890                       03/30/1993
1,761,585                       74/301,062                       03/30/1993
2,700,606                       75/010,706                       03/25/2003
2,701,514                       75/103,278                       03/25/2003
2,700,619                       75/365,146                       03/25/2003
2,700,620                       75/365,147                       03/25/2003
2,700,622                       75/380,344                       03/25/2003
2,700,627                       75/414,117                       03/25/2003
2,699,002                       75/428,722                       03/25/2003
2,701,515                       75/433,917                       03/25/2003
2,700,632                       75/466,363                       03/25/2003
2,700,639                       75/510,183                       03/25/2003
2,699,016                       75/514,038                       03/25/2003
2,700,653                       75/553,012                       03/25/2003
2,700,660                       75/583,809                       03/25/2003
2,699,030                       75/591,675                       03/25/2003
2,699,031                       75/592,363                       03/25/2003
2,700,668                       75/604,879                       03/25/2003
2,699,036                       75/612,530                       03/25/2003
2,700,677                       75/622,671                       03/25/2003
2,699,048                       75/652,324                       03/25/2003
2,699,049                       75/655,385                       03/25/2003
2,699,051                       75/655,848                       03/25/2003
2,700,689                       75/679,802                       03/25/2003
2,700,690                       75/679,805                       03/25/2003
2,700,693                       75/689,126                       03/25/2003
2,700,700                       75/701,719                       03/25/2003
2,700,702                       75/709,828                       03/25/2003
2,699,069                       75/713,050                       03/25/2003
2,700,717                       75/762,453                       03/25/2003
2,700,721                       75/767,589                       03/25/2003
2,700,723                       75/769,333                       03/25/2003
2,700,730                       75/790,975                       03/25/2003
2,700,736                       75/805,990                       03/25/2003
2,700,742                       75/824,730                       03/25/2003
2,699,103                       75/826,263                       03/25/2003
2,700,745                       75/831,207                       03/25/2003
2,699,106                       75/831,456                       03/25/2003
2,699,107                       75/843,269                       03/25/2003
2,699,108                       75/843,372                       03/25/2003
2,699,128                       75/870,557                       03/25/2003
2,699,132                       75/874,262                       03/25/2003
2,699,134                       75/882,905                       03/25/2003
2,699,137                       75/889,691                       03/25/2003
2,700,779                       75/896,003                       03/25/2003
2,700,783                       75/899,465                       03/25/2003
2,700,789                       75/908,671                       03/25/2003
2,700,794                       75/913,061                       03/25/2003
2,699,159                       75/982,624                       03/25/2003
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 190 

2,700,827                       75/983,099                       03/25/2003
2,700,837                       76/000,310                       03/25/2003
2,700,849                       76/016,911                       03/25/2003
2,699,188                       76/030,582                       03/25/2003
2,699,191                       76/032,853                       03/25/2003
2,700,872                       76/037,945                       03/25/2003
2,699,199                       76/043,053                       03/25/2003
2,699,202                       76/044,896                       03/25/2003
2,700,881                       76/047,160                       03/25/2003
2,700,886                       76/056,779                       03/25/2003
2,700,897                       76/067,169                       03/25/2003
2,699,225                       76/067,909                       03/25/2003
2,699,230                       76/070,455                       03/25/2003
2,701,526                       76/071,396                       03/25/2003
2,699,238                       76/077,208                       03/25/2003
2,700,910                       76/078,493                       03/25/2003
2,699,243                       76/079,399                       03/25/2003
2,699,249                       76/087,639                       03/25/2003
2,700,930                       76/099,144                       03/25/2003
2,700,940                       76/105,604                       03/25/2003
2,700,945                       76/107,522                       03/25/2003
2,700,960                       76/118,312                       03/25/2003
2,699,279                       76/118,339                       03/25/2003
2,700,964                       76/118,875                       03/25/2003
2,700,968                       76/121,413                       03/25/2003
2,699,297                       76/132,202                       03/25/2003
2,699,300                       76/136,563                       03/25/2003
2,699,301                       76/136,690                       03/25/2003
2,700,989                       76/136,735                       03/25/2003
2,699,313                       76/145,207                       03/25/2003
2,699,314                       76/145,374                       03/25/2003
2,701,012                       76/149,526                       03/25/2003
2,699,318                       76/150,404                       03/25/2003
2,701,018                       76/152,794                       03/25/2003
2,701,019                       76/153,663                       03/25/2003
2,699,331                       76/158,726                       03/25/2003
2,701,024                       76/158,842                       03/25/2003
2,701,031                       76/165,723                       03/25/2003
2,701,032                       76/166,280                       03/25/2003
2,701,033                       76/166,338                       03/25/2003
2,701,034                       76/166,487                       03/25/2003
2,699,349                       76/169,768                       03/25/2003
2,699,351                       76/170,507                       03/25/2003
2,701,045                       76/171,129                       03/25/2003
2,699,353                       76/171,675                       03/25/2003
2,701,049                       76/172,950                       03/25/2003
2,699,358                       76/173,931                       03/25/2003
2,699,379                       76/183,712                       03/25/2003
2,699,381                       76/184,250                       03/25/2003
2,699,382                       76/186,633                       03/25/2003
2,701,071                       76/188,665                       03/25/2003
2,699,392                       76/191,996                       03/25/2003
2,701,079                       76/192,283                       03/25/2003
2,701,080                       76/193,451                       03/25/2003
2,701,081                       76/193,481                       03/25/2003
2,701,083                       76/195,725                       03/25/2003
2,699,399                       76/195,820                       03/25/2003
2,699,405                       76/201,978                       03/25/2003
2,701,098                       76/202,292                       03/25/2003
2,699,408                       76/204,128                       03/25/2003
2,701,105                       76/208,196                       03/25/2003
2,699,422                       76/209,561                       03/25/2003
2,701,109                       76/211,553                       03/25/2003
2,701,110                       76/212,231                       03/25/2003
2,699,426                       76/212,412                       03/25/2003
2,699,427                       76/213,041                       03/25/2003
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 191 

2,701,126                       76/217,650                       03/25/2003
2,701,128                       76/219,778                       03/25/2003
2,699,452                       76/223,412                       03/25/2003
2,699,458                       76/225,999                       03/25/2003
2,701,141                       76/226,779                       03/25/2003
2,701,144                       76/229,077                       03/25/2003
2,701,146                       76/229,429                       03/25/2003
2,701,147                       76/230,250                       03/25/2003
2,699,464                       76/232,707                       03/25/2003
2,701,153                       76/234,224                       03/25/2003
2,701,537                       76/236,652                       03/25/2003
2,699,472                       76/237,169                       03/25/2003
2,699,474                       76/237,703                       03/25/2003
2,701,160                       76/242,607                       03/25/2003
2,701,542                       76/243,631                       03/25/2003
2,701,162                       76/243,759                       03/25/2003
2,701,166                       76/247,250                       03/25/2003
2,699,497                       76/247,581                       03/25/2003
2,699,501                       76/248,729                       03/25/2003
2,701,175                       76/249,730                       03/25/2003
2,701,176                       76/250,777                       03/25/2003
2,701,179                       76/253,135                       03/25/2003
2,699,514                       76/256,302                       03/25/2003
2,699,515                       76/256,332                       03/25/2003
2,699,523                       76/260,674                       03/25/2003
2,701,190                       76/263,410                       03/25/2003
2,699,527                       76/263,990                       03/25/2003
2,699,531                       76/264,583                       03/25/2003
2,701,193                       76/267,579                       03/25/2003
2,701,194                       76/268,113                       03/25/2003
2,701,196                       76/270,411                       03/25/2003
2,701,197                       76/270,989                       03/25/2003
2,699,542                       76/272,333                       03/25/2003
2,701,203                       76/273,374                       03/25/2003
2,699,547                       76/274,596                       03/25/2003
2,701,210                       76/276,264                       03/25/2003
2,701,212                       76/277,775                       03/25/2003
2,701,214                       76/279,092                       03/25/2003
2,701,222                       76/285,658                       03/25/2003
2,699,575                       76/287,848                       03/25/2003
2,699,583                       76/290,352                       03/25/2003
2,701,233                       76/291,592                       03/25/2003
2,701,234                       76/291,667                       03/25/2003
2,701,235                       76/291,950                       03/25/2003
2,701,237                       76/292,683                       03/25/2003
2,699,586                       76/292,887                       03/25/2003
2,701,244                       76/295,352                       03/25/2003
2,699,593                       76/296,290                       03/25/2003
2,699,594                       76/296,410                       03/25/2003
2,701,246                       76/296,719                       03/25/2003
2,701,267                       76/303,281                       03/25/2003
2,701,268                       76/304,286                       03/25/2003
2,699,617                       76/306,055                       03/25/2003
2,699,619                       76/306,443                       03/25/2003
2,699,620                       76/306,651                       03/25/2003
2,699,627                       76/309,003                       03/25/2003
2,701,279                       76/311,089                       03/25/2003
2,699,642                       76/314,263                       03/25/2003
2,699,645                       76/316,276                       03/25/2003
2,699,651                       76/319,189                       03/25/2003
2,701,304                       76/319,927                       03/25/2003
2,699,653                       76/319,975                       03/25/2003
2,701,305                       76/320,880                       03/25/2003
2,699,660                       76/322,503                       03/25/2003
2,701,555                       76/322,975                       03/25/2003
2,701,311                       76/324,497                       03/25/2003
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 192 

2,699,673                       76/325,300                       03/25/2003
2,699,675                       76/327,446                       03/25/2003
2,699,679                       76/328,109                       03/25/2003
2,701,321                       76/329,246                       03/25/2003
2,701,322                       76/329,792                       03/25/2003
2,701,325                       76/331,090                       03/25/2003
2,699,691                       76/335,640                       03/25/2003
2,699,694                       76/336,089                       03/25/2003
2,699,696                       76/336,493                       03/25/2003
2,699,699                       76/336,853                       03/25/2003
2,701,333                       76/337,337                       03/25/2003
2,699,715                       76/340,254                       03/25/2003
2,699,744                       76/343,728                       03/25/2003
2,701,558                       76/345,014                       03/25/2003
2,701,346                       76/347,455                       03/25/2003
2,699,771                       76/348,917                       03/25/2003
2,699,772                       76/348,918                       03/25/2003
2,699,773                       76/349,195                       03/25/2003
2,699,779                       76/349,992                       03/25/2003
2,701,350                       76/350,134                       03/25/2003
2,701,351                       76/350,135                       03/25/2003
2,699,785                       76/350,547                       03/25/2003
2,699,789                       76/351,142                       03/25/2003
2,699,790                       76/351,255                       03/25/2003
2,699,793                       76/351,644                       03/25/2003
2,699,800                       76/352,853                       03/25/2003
2,699,804                       76/353,082                       03/25/2003
2,699,807                       76/353,469                       03/25/2003
2,701,353                       76/354,299                       03/25/2003
2,699,845                       76/358,701                       03/25/2003
2,699,853                       76/360,319                       03/25/2003
2,699,855                       76/361,468                       03/25/2003
2,701,359                       76/362,082                       03/25/2003
2,699,861                       76/362,682                       03/25/2003
2,699,878                       76/364,031                       03/25/2003
2,699,891                       76/366,389                       03/25/2003
2,699,898                       76/368,291                       03/25/2003
2,699,904                       76/370,899                       03/25/2003
2,699,925                       76/376,693                       03/25/2003
2,699,927                       76/377,125                       03/25/2003
2,699,928                       76/377,126                       03/25/2003
2,699,931                       76/377,553                       03/25/2003
2,699,933                       76/377,736                       03/25/2003
2,699,947                       76/382,095                       03/25/2003
2,699,953                       76/383,670                       03/25/2003
2,699,959                       76/385,139                       03/25/2003
2,699,970                       76/387,137                       03/25/2003
2,699,973                       76/388,287                       03/25/2003
2,699,975                       76/388,388                       03/25/2003
2,699,976                       76/388,464                       03/25/2003
2,699,981                       76/389,931                       03/25/2003
2,699,982                       76/389,948                       03/25/2003
2,699,992                       76/391,363                       03/25/2003
2,699,996                       76/391,819                       03/25/2003
2,700,001                       76/392,794                       03/25/2003
2,700,003                       76/393,105                       03/25/2003
2,700,004                       76/393,106                       03/25/2003
2,700,013                       76/394,861                       03/25/2003
2,700,014                       76/394,957                       03/25/2003
2,700,016                       76/395,501                       03/25/2003
2,700,029                       76/398,178                       03/25/2003
2,700,037                       76/399,469                       03/25/2003
2,700,042                       76/399,850                       03/25/2003
2,700,043                       76/399,851                       03/25/2003
2,700,050                       76/401,605                       03/25/2003
2,700,057                       76/402,939                       03/25/2003
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 193 

2,700,060                       76/403,870                       03/25/2003
2,700,086                       76/409,031                       03/25/2003
2,700,095                       76/411,727                       03/25/2003
2,700,101                       76/413,038                       03/25/2003
2,700,105                       76/413,846                       03/25/2003
2,700,117                       76/415,197                       03/25/2003
2,700,118                       76/415,347                       03/25/2003
2,701,577                       76/416,350                       03/25/2003
2,700,129                       76/417,344                       03/25/2003
2,700,158                       76/420,622                       03/25/2003
2,700,159                       76/420,654                       03/25/2003
2,700,162                       76/421,773                       03/25/2003
2,700,165                       76/422,198                       03/25/2003
2,700,167                       76/422,282                       03/25/2003
2,700,173                       76/422,759                       03/25/2003
2,700,183                       76/424,012                       03/25/2003
2,700,192                       76/424,616                       03/25/2003
2,700,212                       76/426,762                       03/25/2003
2,700,213                       76/426,839                       03/25/2003
2,700,215                       76/427,084                       03/25/2003
2,700,222                       76/429,545                       03/25/2003
2,700,229                       76/431,358                       03/25/2003
2,700,230                       76/431,359                       03/25/2003
2,700,235                       76/431,974                       03/25/2003
2,700,244                       76/434,605                       03/25/2003
2,700,247                       76/435,211                       03/25/2003
2,700,251                       76/435,370                       03/25/2003
2,701,581                       76/439,805                       03/25/2003
2,701,365                       76/975,062                       03/25/2003
2,701,371                       76/975,145                       03/25/2003
2,701,380                       78/012,990                       03/25/2003
2,701,387                       78/023,392                       03/25/2003
2,700,284                       78/028,978                       03/25/2003
2,700,286                       78/029,910                       03/25/2003
2,701,395                       78/030,272                       03/25/2003
2,701,405                       78/043,532                       03/25/2003
2,701,406                       78/043,746                       03/25/2003
2,700,308                       78/044,645                       03/25/2003
2,700,310                       78/045,395                       03/25/2003
2,701,415                       78/047,556                       03/25/2003
2,701,583                       78/048,026                       03/25/2003
2,700,321                       78/052,148                       03/25/2003
2,700,328                       78/061,041                       03/25/2003
2,701,442                       78/067,683                       03/25/2003
2,700,345                       78/070,317                       03/25/2003
2,701,453                       78/071,951                       03/25/2003
2,701,586                       78/076,398                       03/25/2003
2,700,361                       78/080,547                       03/25/2003
2,701,471                       78/082,348                       03/25/2003
2,701,473                       78/084,574                       03/25/2003
2,701,478                       78/085,440                       03/25/2003
2,701,485                       78/088,499                       03/25/2003
2,700,381                       78/092,108                       03/25/2003
2,701,501                       78/100,181                       03/25/2003
2,700,432                       78/104,092                       03/25/2003
2,700,446                       78/111,218                       03/25/2003
2,700,450                       78/113,151                       03/25/2003
2,700,458                       78/116,287                       03/25/2003
2,700,459                       78/116,297                       03/25/2003
2,700,524                       78/131,452                       03/25/2003
2,700,543                       78/135,038                       03/25/2003
2,700,544                       78/135,184                       03/25/2003
2,700,547                       78/135,424                       03/25/2003
2,700,551                       78/135,625                       03/25/2003
2,700,554                       78/135,893                       03/25/2003
2,700,555                       78/136,000                       03/25/2003
2,700,556                       78/136,001                       03/25/2003
2,700,558                       78/136,005                       03/25/2003
2,700,565                       78/137,115                       03/25/2003
2,700,569                       78/137,339                       03/25/2003
2,700,572                       78/137,411                       03/25/2003
2,700,573                       78/137,423                       03/25/2003
2,700,592                       78/138,928                       03/25/2003
2,700,595                       78/139,461                       03/25/2003
2,700,599                       78/140,790                       03/25/2003
2,700,603                       78/142,174                       03/25/2003
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 194 

37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication
                       37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication

   Notice is hereby given of the filing of a national stage application
with a petition under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application
without the signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A
notice has been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor.
The inventor whose signature is missing (Robert Graham HILL) may join in
the application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration
complying with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is
PCT/EP2010/059279 was filed on 30 June 2010 in the names Matthew O'Donnell
and Robert Graham HILL for the invention entitled MULTICOMPONENT GLASSES
FOR USE IN PERSONAL CARE PRODUCTS. The national stage application number is
13/381,392 and has a 35 U.S.C. 371 date of 17 August 2012.


                       37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication

   Notice is hereby given of the filing of a national stage application
with a petition under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application
without the signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A
notice has been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor.
The inventor whose signature is missing (Luke Andrew GIBSON) may join in
the application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration
complying with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is
PCT/US2011/047905 was filed on 16 August 2011 in the names of Luke Andrew
GIBSON, Lauren C. Jasper, and Phillip E. Frederick for the invention
entitled PATIENT-MATCHED ACETABULAR ALIGNMENT TOOL. The national stage
application number is 13/816,132 and has a 35 U.S.C. 371 date of 19
September 2013.


                       37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication

   Notice is hereby given of the filing of a national stage application
with a petition under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application
without the signature of all inventors. The petition has been granted. A
notice has been sent to the last known address of the non-signing inventor.
The inventor whose signature is missing (Donatien FROT) may join in the
application by promptly filing an appropriate oath or declaration complying
with 37 CFR 1.63. The international application number is PCT/EP2011/067932
was filed on 13 October 2011 in the names Christophe PERRIN and Donatien
FROT for the invention entitled STEERING LOCK ANTITHEFT DEVICE FOR MOTOR
VEHICLE. The national stage application number is 13/876,482 and has a 35
U.S.C. 371 date of 15 October 2013.


                       37 CFR 1.47 Notice by Publication

   Notice is hereby given of the filing of a national stage application
with a petition under 37 CFR 1.47 requesting acceptance of the application
without the signature of all of the inventors. The petition has been
granted. A notice has been sent to the last known address of the
non-signing inventor, Thomas A. Hoopes. The inventor whose signature is
missing may join in the application by promptly filing an appropriate oath
or declaration complying with 37 CFR 1.63.  The international application
number is PCT/US2011/065722 and was filed on 19 December 2011 in the names
of Michael J. Hayes, Thomas A. Hoopes, and Mark I. Jurras III for the
invention entitled Detonator Ignition Protection and Detection Circuit.
The national stage application is assigned number 13/994,405 and has a 35
U.S.C. 371(c)(1), (c)(2) and (c)(4) date of 25 September 2013.
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 195 

Registration to Practice
                           Registration to Practice

   The following list contains the names of persons seeking for
registration to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office. Final approval for registration is subject to establishing to the
satisfaction of the Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline
that the person seeking registration is of good moral character and repute.
37 CFR § 11.7  Accordingly, any information tending to affect the
eligibility of any of the following persons on moral ethical or other
grounds should be furnished to the Director of Enrollment and Discipline on
or before December 14, 2013 at the following address: Mail Stop OED United
States Patent and Trademark Office P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria VA 22314

Brueckner, Eric Paul, Shook, Hardy & Bacon, 2555 Grand Blvd., Kansas City,
MO 64108

Carey, Michael Aaron, 159 E. 800 S., Apt. 206, Salt Lake City, UT 84111

Chen, Wanli, 168 Almador, Irvine, CA 92614

Chen, Ying, 4 Arizona Terrace, Apt. 5, Arlington, MA 02474

Chu, Peter Injoon, 5720 Vassar Drive, College Park, MD 20740

Crawford, Joshua Alan, 1111 Army Navy Drive, Apt. 524, Arlington, VA 22202

Doyle, Timothy George, 2094 Cranbrook Drive NE, Grand Rapids, MI 49505

Feng, Michael Cheng, Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear, 2040 Main Street, Suite
1400, Irvine, CA 92614

Fitzpatrick, Kathleen Elyse, Morrison & Foerster LLP, 425 Market Street,
30th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105

Haggerty, Kristofer Leon, 18 Juniper Drive, North Haven, CT 06473

Huguenin-Love, James Lee, 19205 SW 2nd Street, Roca, NE 68430

Joyce, Jeffrey Clayton, Perkins Olson, P.A., 32 Pleasant Street, P.O. Box
449, Portland ME 04112

Kanehira, Yusuke, IBM Corporation, Almaden Research Center, 650 Harry Road,
San Jose, CA 95014-3728

Kinch, Mark Andrew, Ineos Technologies, 150 W. Warrenville Road, Building
300, Naperville, IL 60563

Man, Vincent, Dimock Stratton LLP, 20 Queen Street West, 32nd Floor,
Toronto ON M5H 3R3

Newhouse, Eric Michael, Suiter Swantz PC LLO, 14301 First National Bank
Parkway, Suite 220, Omaha, NE 68154

O'Connor, Mercedes Valeria, Howard B. Rockman P.C., 175 W. Jackson
Boulevard, Suite 1600, Chicago, IL 60604

She, Pengxiang, 1833 Hood Lane, Maple Glen, PA 19002

Switzer, Elise Elizabeth, 6 Valarie Lane, Napa, CA 94558

Tam, Steven Kenfite, 14098 Palomino Way, Saratoga, CA 95070

Verardi, Raffaello, 1700 Kalorama Road NW, Apt. 502, Washington, DC 20009

Waks, Eitan, Landa Corporation, 3 Pekeris Street, Tamar Science Park,
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 196 

Rehovot, Israel 7670203

Wallace, David Ameer, Fenwick & West LLP, 801 California Avenue, Mountain
View, CA 94041

Zak, Clayton Robert, 159 North Jackson Street, Apt. 314, Milwaukee,
WI 53202

October 30, 2013                                           WILLIAM R. COVEY
                   Deputy General Counsel for Enrollment and Discipline and
                        Director of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 197 

Patent Public Advisory Committee Annual Report 2013

PATENT PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 2013


United States Patent and Trademark Office

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

4 November 2013


United States Patent and Trademark Office

PATENT PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

November 4, 2013
Voting Committee Members:

Louis J. Foreman
Chairman
Enventys / Edison Nation

Esther M. Kepplinger
Vice Chair
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Wayne P. Sobon
Inventergy

Clinton Hallman
Kraft Foods

Valerie McDevitt
University of South Florida

Marylee Jenkins
Arent Foxx LLP

Christal A. Sheppard
University of Nebraska

Peter Thurlow
Jones Day

Paul Jacobs
Jake Technology, Inc.

Non-voting Representatives:

Robert D. Budens
President
Patent Office Professional
Association (POPA)

Vernon Ako Towler
Vice President
National Treasury Employees
Union (NTEU, Local 243)

Catherine Faint
Vice President
National Treasury Employees
Union (NTEU, Local 245)

The President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 10500-0001

Dear Mr. President:

        As Chairman of the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), it is my honor and privilege to present you with the PPAC Annual Report for the 2013 fiscal year. This past year has brought the final implementation of the America Invents Act (AIA), ushering in the most comprehensive overhaul to the U.S. patent system in nearly 100 years. With this, the USPTO experienced budget cuts from the Sequester, and the impact sequestration has had on patent operations. In our report, we have outlined nine areas of interest and concern.

        The USPTO has done an exemplary job of maintaining the quality and productivity of the Office under the challenging circumstances that sequestration unexpectedly thrust upon them. However, if sequestration continues for the ten years that the Budget Control Act of 2011 envisions, it is PPAC’s opinion that pendency of patent applications will increase and there will be a dramatic reduction in the ability of innovators to start businesses and to create jobs.

        As you stated in your September 16, 2011 statement upon signing the America Invents Act:

         Over the last decade, patent applications have nearly tripled. And because the Patent Office doesn’t have the resources to deal with all of them, right now there are about 700,000 applications that haven’t even been opened yet. These are jobs and businesses of the future just waiting to be created.

Remarks by the President at Signing of the America Invents Act, White House Press Release (September 16, 2011), http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/16/remarks-president-signing-america-invents-act

        The PPAC echoes this sentiment. Ultimately, it is the American public and the economy that will suffer in the long-term while innovations wait for USPTO action.

        The patents granted by the USPTO drive the economic engine that has helped lift this country from the recession. The ability to prevent others from making, using, or selling an invention is the security inventors and innovators seek, and it provides the incentive to invest the capital in research, development, and to create new businesses. Therefore, it is essential that the Office receive stable and predictable funding to improve operations, support new initiatives, and to work through the backlog of patent applications that has delayed the creation of potential new jobs and breakthrough technologies.

        The fee setting authority provided within the AIA accorded the Office the ability to raise fees by 15% and to address the mounting issues in Information Technology and the examining corps. Unfortunately, this was short-lived as the Sequester negated the intended impacts of these new user-generated fees. While we understand that these are the collateral damage associated with the Sequester, we respectfully ask that the Office be allowed to access the fees that it generates, or, at the very least, be provided access to these fees at some point in the very near future.

        During FY 2013, the PPAC worked closely with former USPTO Director David Kappos and Deputy Director Teresa Stanek Rea. Their leadership during the past twelve months has allowed the Office to operate with a high level of efficiency while maintaining, and improving, employee morale. The current financial environment of the Sequester raises challenges which threaten to undermine the impressive improvements made by the USPTO over the last few years. Similarly, the Sequester jeopardizes the ability of the next appointed Director to continue protecting inventors’ intellectual property rights and to steer the Office through these unchartered waters.

        I sincerely appreciate your time reviewing this report, and the PPAC welcomes any questions you or your staff might have.

        Respectfully,
        signature
         Louis J. Foreman
Chairman
Patent Public Advisory Committee
United States Patent and Trademark Office
  
Enclosure: Patent Public Advisory Committee Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Report

cc:The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy,Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
 The Honorable Robert W. Goodlatte,Chairman, House Judiciary Committee
 The Honorable Charles E. Grassley,Ranking Minority Member,
Senate Judiciary Committee
 The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.,Ranking Minority Member, House Judiciary Committee
 The Honorable Howard Coble,Chairman, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet
 The Honorable Melvin L. Watt,Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet
 The Honorable Penny Pritzker,Secretary of Commerce
 The Honorable Teresa Stanek Rea,Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
 Margaret Focarino,Commissioner for Patents

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
  INTRODUCTION
  PPAC PROCESSES
    A. FINANCE
    B. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT)
    C. REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION (RCEs)
    D. HUMAN CAPITAL
    E. QUALITY AND PENDENCY
    F. INTERNATIONAL
    G. PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD (PTAB OR BOARD)
    H. LEGISLATION
    I. OUTREACH
TOPICAL AREAS
  I.   FINANCE
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. OFFICE RESPONSE TO THE ESTIMATED 5% REDUCTION IN REVENUE DUE TO SEQUESTRATION
    C. CONCLUSION
    D. RECOMMENDATIONS
  II.   INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. MISSION OF THE OCIO AND STRATEGIC IT OBJECTIVES
    C. MID-YEAR BUDGET REDUCTIONS
    D. OCIO PROGRESS IN 2012-2013
    E. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE OCIO FOR 2014
  III.   REQUEST FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. NEW INITIATIVES
    C. RCE OUTREACH PROGRAM
    D. RECOMMENDATIONS
    E. CONCLUSIONS
  IV.   HUMAN CAPITAL
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. EXAMINER HIRING AND RETENTION
    C. EFFECTS OF UNCERTAINTY IN BUDGETS ON HIRING
    D. INITIATIVES TO INCREASE EXAMINATION CAPACITY
    E. SUMMARY OF PPAC RECOMMENDATIONS
  V.   PATENT QUALITY
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. PATENT QUALITY OUTREACH
    C. PATENT QUALITY COMPOSITE
    D. RECOMMENDATIONS
  VI.   PATENT PENDENCY
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. SEQUESTRATION
    C. AFTER FINAL CONSIDERATION PILOT
    D. TRACK ONE (PRIORITIZED EXAMINATION)
    E. PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY (PPH)
    F. TRAINING AND INITIATIVES
    G. RECOMMENDATIONS
  VII.   PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD (PTAB)
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. BOARD STAFF
    C. BOARD BACKLOG
    D. AIA PROGRESS
    E. CHALLENGES MOVING FORWARD
  VIII.   LEGISLATION
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. WHITE HOUSE EXECUTIVE ACTIONS AND LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES
    C. CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS
    D. PENDING LEGISLATION
    E. RECOMMENDATIONS
  IX.   INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND WORK SHARING
    A. SUBSTANTIVE PATENT LAW HARMONIZATION
    B. TECHNICAL AND PROCEDURAL HARMONIZATION: WORK SHARING AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION PROGRAMS
    C. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
  X.   USPTO OUTREACH INITIATIVES
    A. INTRODUCTION
    B. INVENTORS CONFERENCES AND WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURSHIP SYMPOSIUMS
    C. USPTO REGIONAL OFFICE OUTREACH
    D. SUPPORTING INVENTOR ORGANIZATIONS
    E. MINORITY/UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES
    F. PRO BONO PROGRAM AND BAR ASSOCIATION ENGAGEMENT
    G. TRAINING MATERIALS AND WEB-BASED SUPPORT
    H. IP ASSESSMENT TOOL/SMALL BUSINESS EDUCATION
    I UNIVERSITY OUTREACH/TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
    J. MUSEUM OUTREACH
    K. RECOMMENDATIONS
APPENDIX
  LOUIS J. FOREMAN, CHAIRMAN
  ESTHER M. KEPPLINGER, VICE CHAIR
  WAYNE P. SOBON
  VALERIE LANDRIO MCDEVITT, J. D., MST
  CLINTON H. HALLMAN, JR.
  MARYLEE JENKINS
  A. CHRISTAL SHEPPARD, Ph.D., J.D.
  PETER THURLOW
  PAUL JACOBS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) thanks the United States Patent and Trademark Office former Director David Kappos and Deputy Director Teresa Rea for providing highly positive and substantial opportunities to work productively. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or “the Office”) and its personnel uniformly provided updates, in-depth information and detailed explanations of the issues facing the Office and its stakeholders. The open, responsive attitude consistently displayed by USPTO personnel fostered a constructive relationship between the PPAC and the USPTO, enabling all members and USPTO personnel to engage in very open and complete discussion of the Office’s current operations, new initiatives, and challenges.

The dynamic leadership of Former Director Kappos and Deputy Director Rea coupled with the cooperative efforts made by the employee unions have resulted in significant progress this year. Director Kappos created a positive atmosphere, endorsed and extended by Deputy Director Rea, which encouraged increased interactions between the PPAC and the USPTO, the users and the USPTO and most significantly, the examiners and the applicants. This proactive tone fostered an atmosphere of trust and cooperation resulting in productive interactions with all of the management officials at the USPTO. We thank all of the officials of the USPTO and the union representatives with whom we have worked during the past year, and in particular, the inspirational leadership of Director Kappos and Deputy Director Rea. We are extremely grateful for the support accorded us by all individuals at the USPTO, thus assisting us in our roles on the PPAC. We look forward to our ongoing work with the USPTO.

The USPTO has done an exemplary job in FY 2013 maintaining the quality and productivity of the Office under challenging circumstances; however, the utmost concern of the PPAC is the application of the statutorily required spending reductions in the Budget Control Act of 2011 – known as sequestration – to the Office. As PPAC noted in its September 24, 2012 Fee Setting Report, we as a Committee supported additional user fee increases proposed by the Office, above and beyond the prior 15 percent across-the-board surcharge, in large part because we understood the critical need for the Office to make significant infrastructure (including information technology) and human capital improvements, to improve the quality of granted patents, and reduce the time of examination and other process improvements.   PPAC approved the set of user-fee increases and changes proposed by the Office based in significant part on assurances by the relevant government stakeholders that the entirety of such user fees would remain available for use by the Office to achieve critical and widely accepted operational goals.

Because of sequestration, $148 million of collected user fees will be unavailable to the Office. The unexpected reduction in revenues as a result of sequestration had a significant impact on every part of the USPTO’s operations. These impacts are detailed throughout this report. Should the sequestration continue for the ten years that the Budget Control Act of 2011 envisions, it is PPAC’s opinion that pendency of patent applications will increase and dramatically reduce the ability of innovators to start businesses and to create jobs. Ultimately, it is the American public and the economy that will suffer in the long-term while innovations wait for USPTO action.

This report is to provide readers with a review of the activities of the PPAC during FY 2013, the challenges faced by the USPTO, and the Committee’s conclusions and recommendations for continued execution on the goals and objectives stated in the USPTO 2010-2014Strategic Plan.

PPAC PROCESSES

The PPAC holds quarterly meetings at the USPTO to address patent-related matters. These meetings are announced in advance, are open to the public, are webcast, and have telephone call-in numbers so interested persons can provide real-time feedback and ideas. We encourage members of the public to submit comments and questions via telephone, e-mail, or via the PPAC Website. The Committee also participates in hearings, roundtables and other publically announced events to obtain input regarding matters of significance to the USPTO and the innovation communities. In the past, the Committee held hearings on the new fees associated with the Fee Setting provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). Recently the PPAC participated in the roundtables and focus sessions on reducing the backlog of patent applications associated with Request for Continued Examination (RCEs).

The Committee has several standing subcommittees to address topical areas that are focused upon issues that require action over time. The subcommittees consist of up to four members. Subcommittees meet informally from time to time, either in person or via teleconferences. The topical areas discussed in detail below represent matters of ongoing interest to the USPTO and the Committee. Topical area subcommittees interact with USPTO personnel to obtain information, engage in in-depth discussions, and provide suggestions to assist the Office.

Members of the subcommittees have greatly appreciated the high level of cooperation and trust afforded by Office personnel. For this trust, the Committee sincerely thanks former Director Kappos, Deputy Director Rea and other Office personnel for helping to create a very positive effective working relationship for the benefit of the entire user community.

Brief descriptions of the PPAC’s activities and how those have furthered the Strategic Plan are below. More detailed descriptions are provided in the individual sections.

A.      FINANCE

Fiscal year 2013 was an extraordinarily challenging year for the Office with an unprecedented number of potential financially-disruptive events. On March 16, 2013, the United States became a first-inventor-to-file country after two centuries of being a first-to-invent country; on March 19, 2013, a new user fee structure came into effect significantly raising certain costs to applicants that are associated with obtaining a patent.

As PPAC noted in its Fee Setting Report last year, we as a Committee accepted the additional user fee increases proposed by the Office, above and beyond the prior 15 percent across-the-board surcharge, in large part because we understood the critical need for the Office to make significant infrastructure (including information technology) and human capital improvements, to improve the quality of granted patents, and reduce pendency of patent applications and other process improvements.

Had we known that, immediately upon its effect, the increase in user fees would not be fully available for use by the Office for patent-related activities, the purposes for which the increase in user fees were intended, the PPAC might have reached a different conclusion in our 2012 Fee Setting Report. In addition, we note that it is particularly problematic that the sequestration of funding from the USPTO began almost simultaneously with the imposition of the user fee increase.

Sequestration is projected to siphon $148 million of user fees away from Office-related operations in FY2013. The application of sequestration to the Office was surprising given that the Office a 100 percent user-fee-funded organization -- no tax dollars are used to support any part of the operation -- and clear language signed into law in the AIA in 2011, was specifically intended to ensure stable funding for the Office. The USPTO only collects from users the fees necessary to cover operations and related expenses. Thus, when any of the fees collected are not available to the Office, the Office does not have the funds necessary to maintain operations.

The effects of the Sequester are many. Particularly problematic are the delays in the implementation of critical updates to the fragile and outdated information technology (IT) system, without which the USPTO cannot function; delays in hiring patent examiners with consequently result in delays in reducing patent pendency; and an inability to fully implement the satellite offices.

Recommendations: A consistent funding stream and full access to fees for this 100 percent user-fee-funded agency is essential to the operation of the Office. As such, the PPAC urges 1) the Administration to reconsider the application of the sequester to the Office; 2) the Congress to again consider removing the Office from the appropriations process; 3) the Office to be more cautious in order to avoid over-estimating revenues and delay satellite offices implementation until sufficient resources are available; and 4) all stakeholders to delay imposing additional legislative and executive burdens on the Office unless full access to user fees is restored. Moreover, the PPAC recommends that the Office strike a better balance of IT investment with hiring in order to more quickly improve the IT systems.

B.      INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT)

In 2012-2013, the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) continued its efforts to carry on its mission in the face of a dramatic mid-year budget reduction that resulted from the combined effects of sequestration and other financial factors. As a “discretionary” center, the IT sector disproportionately bore the brunt of these cuts, with a particularly devastating impact on ongoing strategic technology initiatives.

The Office has undertaken a set of modernization initiatives to update aging infrastructure. These initiatives are necessary to create and sustain an up-to-date, stable, reliable and secure technology environment to support the work of employees and the increasingly “wired” user community. These modernizations will not only improve patent quality (for example, through better search capabilities) while maintaining examination efficiency, but also improve the efficiency of communications with users through a reliable IT system.

While these updates may seem to be a luxury in difficult financial times, the outdated IT systems of the USPTO are increasingly at risk of catastrophic failure. As we move to an entirely electronic Office, the work of the USPTO cannot be performed without critical maintenance and modernization of these essential IT systems.

While there were no immediate disastrous effects of the nearly $80 million in IT pullbacks – no major system failures, nor noticeable declines in patent quality or worker productivity -- the PPAC believes that the delays in IT improvements resulting from the Sequester have already put a damper on further progress in reducing pendency and improving quality.

Recommendations: The dramatic mid-year cuts in 2013 have significantly compromised mission-critical IT systems at the Office and derailed modernization efforts aimed at improving quality and reducing pendency, among other strategic objectives. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO provide increased funding for IT, protect IT from future cuts, resume and accelerate Patents End-to-End, continue to stabilize the legacy IT systems, expand support for the global IT community, and continue to upgrade and expand links with stakeholders.

C.      REQUESTS FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION (RCEs)

The PPAC is pleased to report that progress was made during FY 2013 in reducing the backlog of RCEs and the implementation of several changes which are anticipated to provide further improvements during FY 2014.

Following the move of RCEs from the examiner’s amended docket to the special continuing docket, the backlog of RCEs ballooned from about 17,000 in October of 2009 to over 110,000 in March of 2013; however, changes to the count system and focused attention on RCEs has reduced the backlog to 78,272 at the end of September 2013. The USPTO reordered the work on examiners’ dockets to focus efforts on examining RCEs while making continued progress towards reducing the unexamined new patent application backlog. The USPTO significantly reduced the backlog of RCEs while simultaneously also reducing the backlog of unexamined applications to about 586,000. These are impressive achievements.

The USPTO had implemented two programs, the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) and Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement (QPIDS), which had been well received by the patent bar as innovative procedures to facilitate consideration of amendments or new references and avoid the need for the filing of an RCE. During FY 2013, the AFCP was adjusted with a follow-on program AFCP 2.0, expected to continue providing other options to applicants than filing an RCE.

Also, USPTO is working with the examiner union to implement a goal of four months on average from filing the request for an RCE to completion of a first action on RCEs.

In order to identify causes of RCE filings, the USPTO sought comments through a Federal Register Notice and held roundtable and focus sessions in Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, New York City and Alexandria, Virginia. The received comments were categorized into themes for the development of actions and initiatives including education of examiners and users about available programs; possible extension of Quick Path Information Disclosure Statements (QPIDS); internal training regarding final rejections and aspects of quality examination; and possible options for prosecution flexibility. The twin goals are to reduce the backlog of RCEs and find ways to avoid the need for future RCEs.

The USPTO demonstrated flexibility and creativity in identifying initiatives to address the RCE problem. The PPAC applauds the actions taken and efforts directed to the improvement of the RCE filing and backlogs.

Recommendation: PPAC recommends exploring an avenue for resolution of issues in prosecution other than an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) such as permitting applicant participation in the pre-appeal brief conference or a new program that would permit an interview with multiple primary examiners in addition to the examiner of record. PPAC also recommends that the Office consider the appropriateness of designating as final rejections, those rejections over newly cited prior art when only minor amendments were made following a first office action.

D.      HUMAN CAPITAL

Human capital remains a significant area of concern for the PPAC. During FY 2013, due in significant part to budget constraints as a result of sequestration, only 559 new examiners were hired instead of a planned 1,000 (which had already been reduced from the 1,500 planned in the FY 2013 President’s Budget). Furthermore, the planned hiring of new examiners in FY 2014 has also been revised to 750. The improving economy and the recent surge in new hires have also led to a higher attrition rate. In FY 2013, the preliminary attrition rate was 4.22 percent, compared to a 3.07 percent rate in FY 2012.

In FY 2012, the first Satellite Office in Detroit, Michigan, opened for business, and at the end of FY 2013 had hired and trained 101 patent examiners and brought on 10 PTAB judges. Satellite Offices in Dallas, Denver, and the Silicon Valley were also announced. While several judges for the PTAB have been hired, no patent examiners were hired for these offices in FY 2013, and hiring in FY 2014 is on hold for these offices until permanent space can be procured.

Efforts at attracting and maintaining a skilled corps of examiners is critical to effective examination of applications, reducing patent pendency, and reducing backlog.

Recommendation: The PPAC recommends that the Office have full access to its user fees as soon as possible to allow for the hiring of at least 750 new examiners in FY 2014. The PPAC recommends continuing to target experienced IP professionals for the available new examiner positions and to advance geographical expansion of the work force and telework initiatives to attract a larger pool of well-qualified candidates and further enhance retention of experienced examiners for an entire career. Finally, the PPAC recommends that the Office be given sufficient funding to permit targeted overtime and restore the previous levels of outsourcing of Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) searches to allow compliance with the Treaty deadlines while enabling the Examiner Corps to focus on domestic applications.

E.      QUALITY AND PENDENCY

The issuance of high quality patents with a reasonable pendency remains the most important priority for the USPTO. The Office made positive strides in addressing both patent quality and pendency during FY 2013.

Quality

Improvements were made in patent quality by focusing on after final practice and aspects of 35 U.S.C. 112. For one such initiative, the Office held a number of successful outreach visits, one in Silicon Valley and one in New York, to the patent community to gather comments regarding patent quality specifically related to software patents. Each meeting focused on establishing clear boundaries for claims that use functional language and employing certain techniques in the preparation and prosecution of patent applications. The common discussion points included Section 112, paragraph (a) requirements directed to written description, paragraph (b) requirements directed to indefiniteness, and paragraph (f) requirements directed to functional claiming. In conjunction with the meeting, a Federal Register notice requested comments from the public. The Office emphasized that any lessons learned would be applied to patent applications in every technological field and to the entire examination process. Stemming from these comments and input, the USPTO has begun implementing training of examiners on these issues.

Overall, the evaluation of quality, as represented in the Quality Composite, revealed that the quality continues on an upward trend.

Pendency

The USPTO continued to make improvements to decrease pendency to first action and total pendency during FY 2013 with achieving 29.1 months for total pendency and 18.2 months for pendency to first action. This reflects a reduction from FY 2012’s 32.4 months and 21.9 months, respectively, which are laudable improvements, showing significant progress towards the goals of 20 months total pendency and 10 months pendency to first action.

Instrumental in these gains was a focus on moving the oldest new applications, hiring new examiners, and several initiatives, including Track One, After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (AFCP 2.0) and the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH), implemented by the USPTO.

Recommendation: Although pendency is a very high priority for applicants, ensuring that the USPTO can accomplish its work is essential. The PPAC recommends that funding of IT be appropriately prioritized and properly balanced with hiring so as to more quickly improve the IT systems in FY 2014. Patent examiners are essential to achieving a reduction in pendency, but without IT systems, no applications will be completed.

F.      INTERNATIONAL

The Committee applauds the USPTO for its ongoing efforts and achievements in the international arena. The Committee notes a few highlights for the past year - the productive global meetings of the Tegernsee Group and the Five Intellectual Property Offices (IP5) (which includes the European Patent Office, Japan Patent Office, Korean Intellectual Property Office, State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of China and the United States Patent and Trademark Office), the growth and continued acceptance of the PPH by the patent user community, the launch of the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) and the implementation of new online international searching tools, such as the Global Patent Search Network (GPSN).

The Committee supports the strides made by the USPTO in its international cooperation and work sharing initiatives among multiple patent offices and encourages the continued development and expansion of these efforts. The PPH and the Global Dossier are excellent examples of such strides and the continuing need and importance for an effective and user- friendly patent application platform across multiple patent offices.

The Committee cannot ignore the funding issues for the USPTO with respect to its ongoing international initiatives and programs. For example, the recent budget cuts have greatly limited the number of USPTO representatives who can attend important global meetings with other patent office officials. Not providing a complete delegation of USPTO representatives at these meetings only further complicates the USPTO’s efforts.

Recommendations: The PPAC encourages further outreach through a variety of forums to extend discussions among multiple patent offices – not just the Tegernsee Group and IP5. The Committee supports ongoing education and updates regarding the USPTO’s international initiatives and programs via roundtables, webcasts and e-mail notices to the patent user community.

G.      PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD (PTAB OR BOARD)

As of September 23, 2013, the Board includes 177 judges. Although staffing of the satellite offices with patent examiners has been delayed as a consequence of the sequestration, each of the satellite offices does include PTAB judges. More specifically, the Dallas office has five judges, the Silicon Valley office has eight judges, the Denver office has eight judges, and the Detroit office has ten judges. The placement of these satellite offices around the country has expanded the ability of the Board to employ qualified individuals to meet its growing workload. The Board continues to review candidates and plans on hiring additional judges in FY 2014.

The backlog of ex parte appeals pending at the Board stands at 25,554 applications, down from a peak of 26,896 applications in February 2013. The growth of the backlog has been halted for now as more decisions were issued by the Board as compared to new appeals received by the Board in the last six months.

As of September 26, 2013, the Board received 579 total petitions – 522 inter partes review proceedings (IPRs), 56 covered business method review proceedings (CBMs), and one derivation proceeding. The majority of the petitions were in the electrical/computer software area. In particular, the petition filings by area of technology were: 68.7% electrical/computer software; 13.8% mechanical; 9.3% chemical; 7.3% biotechnology/pharmaceutical; and 0.9% design. With respect to IPRs and CBMs, patent owners have submitted 247 preliminary responses and waived their rights to submit a preliminary response in 61 cases

Recommendations: With the implementation of the AIA, the PTAB was statutorily required to handle significantly more work and provide entirely new services for new programs, and at about the same time, the sequestration made unavailable some of the fees provided by users to the USPTO. PPAC feels strongly that the USPTO should be accorded full access to all user fees so that they may secure the resources necessary to do the work with continued high quality and in the statutorily required time frames.

H.      LEGISLATION

While the past few years have been focused on the passage and implementation of the AIA, the majority of legislative activity in the current year seems focused primarily on so-called patent litigation abuse. Both the White House and the Congress have proposed a number of both administrative and legislative actions to address various issues raised concerning abusive litigation tactics. While sometimes ascribed pejoratively to “patent trolls” or “non-practicing entities” (NPEs), the PPAC notes that a consensus seems to be forming that it is less the status of a particular company rather than the particular abusive actions taken that bears the most fruitful attention.

The PPAC will be working closely with the Office as it reviews and enacts any of the particular recommended administrative changes. The PPAC remains concerned that these new mandates have been placed on the Office, even as a significant amount of its funding has been taken away under sequestration. The PPAC also remains concerned that the implementation of any such administrative actions are carefully and thoughtfully tailored to attack exactly the right sorts of abuses, without unduly burdening both patent applicants as well as rightful assertions of patent rights, which after all, provide lawful rights to exclude others from practicing new, non-obvious and useful inventions.

Recommendations: The PPAC will continue to monitor and consult with the USPTO as the legislative and administrative processes continue to address abusive activities. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO ensure that any proposed administrative changes are appropriately and narrowly targeted for any such alleged abuse without unduly harming our overall patent system, the smooth operation of the examination process, the quality of patents issued, or the overall costs and burdens to applicants.

The PPAC remains concerned that the OMB has made the determination that USPTO user-fees are also subject to sequestration. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO continue to work with the Administration and Congress to ensure that the USPTO has access to all of its fees.

I.      OUTREACH

In addition to the robust outreach activities conducted by the other outreach teams at the USPTO, the Office of Innovation Development (OID) oversees Patent’s efforts to support American innovation, entrepreneurship, and job creation. Often working closely with other U.S. Government officials and agencies, OID designs and implements outreach assistance programs to a wide range of stakeholders including independent inventors, women, small business concerns, university affiliates, minorities, and other underserved communities.

OID also assists the Office’s educational outreach programs that promote intellectual property protection and the valuable role it plays as a key driver of the American economy. These programs are designed to educate the public about intellectual property in general, as well as about the specifics of the patent application process, including the intricacies of patent prosecution and post grant patent issues. Post patent grant education includes the importance of patents, and other forms of IP, in starting, building, and growing a business.

In addition, OID and the office’s other outreach teams work collaboratively on the development of educational materials, activities, and programs to promote intellectual property for students, educators, and young inventors and innovators of all ages, including a particular focus on Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM).

It is noteworthy that the USPTO creatively maintained a full portfolio of education and outreach throughout FY 2013 even when challenged with budget constraints. Though these constraints necessitated a nearly complete reduction in travel, OID staff maintained exemplary levels of service to stakeholders through web cast opportunities, use of on-the-ground resources or other Federal colleagues where possible and efforts to move distant events to the USPTO main campus where possible.

Recommendations: The PPAC commends the Office on the significant outreach efforts to the entire user community from women entrepreneurs and independent inventors, to bar associations and national organizations. Nonetheless, sequestration has negatively impacted the amount and form of outreach that was possible. The PPAC recommends that the Office continue to make itself available to all aspects of the user community and continue to be creative in finding ways to provide outreach even under sequester.

TOPICAL AREAS

I.      FINANCE

A.      INTRODUCTION

Fiscal year 2013 was an extraordinarily challenging year for the Office with an unprecedented number of potentially financially disruptive events. March 16, 2013, the United States became a first-inventor-to-file country after two centuries of being a first-to-invent country; March 19, 2013, a new user fee structure came into effect significantly raising certain costs associated with obtaining a patent. Both events were predicted to be disruptive to user filing behavior. We applaud the Office for taking into account, at the time of the development of the budget, the compound problem of the uncertainty of the effect on user behavior of the fee increase and the conversion from a first-to-invent to first-inventor-to-file system. Specifically, the Office’s models considered the elasticity of an increase in revenue in the short-term early in the year with precipitous drops post implementation. However, the siphoning of 8.6 percent of the user fees as a result of sequestration, starting on March 1, 2013, was completely unanticipated.

The Office planned for, and the users would have paid for, approximately $227 million ($202 million for patents) more in revenue in FY 2013 than FY 2012. This increase in revenue due to the increase in fees was slated to go toward implementing a sustainable funding model, reducing the current patent application backlog, decreasing patent pendency, improving patent quality and upgrading the Office’s patent business information technology capabilities and infrastructure.

Sequestration is projected to siphon $148 million (approximately $135 million for patents) of user fees away from Office-related operations. Thus, instead of the originally projected $227 million increase in revenue, which was adjusted to $207 million based on the downward revision of the fee increases, the Office will only receive roughly $80 million ($68 million for patents and $12 million for trademarks). Taking into account the most recent adjustment in spending undertaken by the Office in response to the implementation of the sequestration and other factors, the Office will endure a $267 million (9.5%) reduction in planned spending from the Office’s requirements in the FY 2013 President’s Budget.

United States Patent and Trademark Office FY2013 Operating Plan

The application of sequestration to the Office was surprising given that the Office is fully funded by user fees and clear language signed into law in the AIA in 2011 that was specifically intended to ensure stable funding for the Office. The sequestration is a reversion to the old days of user-fee diversion.

To most observers, user-fee-funded agencies fall into an exemption from sequestration provided for in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.1 The exemption excludes from sequestration “[a]ctivities financed by voluntary payments to the Government for goods or services to be provided for such payments.”2 Fees paid by users of the patent systems are such fees.

1 2 U.S.C. § 905

2 2 U.S.C. 905(g)(1)(a)

Moreover, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Report on the sequestration specifically stated that the sequestration would apply to the appropriated level, $2.95 billion.3 Since the Office was projected to, and did, collect less in user-fees than the appropriated levels, it was thought that no funds would be sequestered, as the Office’s user fee collections would never reach the level of the agency’s appropriated spending authority less sequestration.

Sequestrable Budetary Resources and Reductions in Sequestrable Resources by OMB Acount - FY 2013

Despite both of these rational potential implementations, and considerable confusion for months as to how the sequestration would be applied to user-fee-funded agencies, the OMB made clear that the sequestration would apply to the Office and subsequently clarified that it would be taken from actual fees collected.

B.      OFFICE RESPONSE TO THE ESTIMATED 5% REDUCTION IN REVENUE DUE TO SEQUESTRATION

      

1.    Impact of Sequestration on Pendency

      

At the start of FY 2013, the Office was on target to meet its patent application pendency goal of 10 months to first action by 2016 and 20 months total patent application pendency by 2017. The Office was also on track to draw down the patent application backlog and reach the optimal inventory level in FY 2016. As a result of the unanticipated decrease in funding in FY 2013, the Office had to revise these timelines. The pendency goal of 10 months to first action has been delayed until FY 2019.three years. The pendency goal of 20 months for total patent pendency has been delayed until FY 2018.

      

2.    Impact of Sequestration on Personnel

      

All non-critical hiring was placed on an indefinite hold including the hiring of patent examiners that were necessary to manage the predicted 5 percent annual increase in patent filings. The Office intended to hire 1000 examiners in FY 2013. The sequestration resulted in a significant reduction in hiring. Additionally, travel and training were scaled back to only include mission critical activities.

      

3.    Impact of Sequestration on Information Technology

      

Although information technology support and modernization is a mission critical activity, it is the largest source of discretionary funding within the Office. To ameliorate the effects, the information technology budget was severely reduced. The Office’s modernization efforts, including PE2E and Fee Processing Next Generation were delayed indefinitely. Contracts with expertise in the Office’s systems and operations were terminated.

      

4.    Impact of Sequestration on Satellite Offices

      

The hiring of employees for the existing and planned satellite offices was eliminated from the budget. Contract awards for existing and planned satellite offices and the planned transition to permanent space for the offices in Denver, Dallas and Silicon Valley were delayed indefinitely, with the exception of funds needed to sustain previously negotiated commitments with other Federal agencies and industry suppliers.

C.      CONCLUSION

This situation is of utmost concern to the PPAC. In the PPAC’s opinion, this is the resurgence of a crisis in funding that will significantly and adversely impact the efficiency and effectiveness of the Office.

The USPTO only collects from users the fees necessary to cover operations and related expenses. Thus, when any of the fees collected are not available to the Office, the Office does not have the funds necessary to maintain operations. Bluntly, this means that sequestration resulted in insufficient funds for the Office to do the job for which the user paid. That is the situation in which the Office yet again finds itself. According to the Office’s audited financial statements from FY 1992 to FY 2012, over one billion dollars of the user fee collections were not available to the Office. This, combined with a steady increase of application filings, led to a significant backlog of applications awaiting examination and an information technology deficit.

Traveling down that path again, whether by Congressional or Administration (as is the case now) action, erodes the progress made toward improving patent quality, reducing pendency, and toward achieving the goal of 10 months to first action and 20 months total patent pendency. The United States faces many challenges in the increasingly competitive global economy. Now is not the time to hinder the Office that provides the fuel to the engine of this Nation’s creativity.

In its review of the fee-setting process, the PPAC endorsed the set of user-fee increases and changes proposed by the Office based in significant part on statements of assurance by the relevant government stakeholders that the entirety of such user fees would remain available for use by the Office to achieve critical and widely accepted operational goals. Had the PPAC known that, immediately upon its effect, all such new voluntarily paid user fees would not be available for the Office for patent related activities, for which the increase in user fees were intended, the PPAC might have reached a different conclusion in the report. It is particularly problematic that the sequestration of funding from the USPTO began almost simultaneously with the imposition of the user fee increase.

This reversion eviscerates a compromise agreement that was made to the users regarding the increase in fees and undermines user confidence in the system. The users accepted the additional user-fee increases proposed by the Office, above and beyond the prior 15 percent across-the-board surcharge, in large part because of the critical need for the Office to make significant infrastructure (including IT) and human capital improvements, to improve the quality of granted patents, and reduce time to examination and other systemic losses.  

Quite simply, the PPAC believes should the sequester continue for the statutory ten years and the Office continue to be subject to it, not only will the gains made in quality and pendency be erased, long-term damage to the effectiveness and efficiency of the Office will occur that will take even longer to overcome. As President Obama stated in his September 16th 2011 statement upon signing the AIA (the Act that enabled the user-fee increases):

      

Over the last decade, patent applications have nearly tripled.  And because the Patent Office doesn’t have the resources to deal with all of them, right now there are about 700,000 applications that haven’t even been opened yet. These are jobs and businesses of the future just waiting to be created.”

Ultimately, it is the American public and the economy that will suffer in the long-term while innovations wait for USPTO action.

Fortunately, the Office did benefit from other events. Filing and the associated revenue were better than expected (with a filing rate currently trending at 6.5 percent patent filing growth level compared to the estimated 5.0 percent planning assumption). Post fee increase revenue recovered more quickly than planned and the Office worked as a unit to minimize the near-term operational impacts of the sequestration. Nevertheless, the Office will end FY 2013 with $148 million less than users paid (approximately $135 million for patents) solely attributable to sequestration. This action brought the total monetary amount of user fees paid, which were unavailable to the Office to $1.2 Billion since FY 1992.

D.      RECOMMENDATIONS

      

1.    PPAC urges the Administration to reconsider the Application of the Sequester to the Office

      

The USPTO is a 100 percent user-fee funded organization. No tax dollars are used to support any part of the operation. The users of the systems pay for salaries and benefits including retirement, equipment, infrastructure, contracts, and every other aspect of the operation. These users who pay patent application, issuance, maintenance and other fees entirely support the system. One result of such a user fee funded agency is that fluctuations in the economy and user behavior, which are difficult to predict, can have an immediate impact on operations. Predicting accurately the revenues of the Office in advance on a year-to-year basis is thus a challenging, if not impossible task because it includes within the analysis a guessing game on the behavior of multiple players in the process and the strength of the economy.

      

Congress recognized that 1) fluctuation in user behavior, and 2) the inability for the Office to respond to these fluctuations, was increasingly a stress on the efficient operation of the Office4. In response, in the AIA, the Congress responded by temporarily granting the Office the statutory authority to set its fees and concurrently established within the Treasury of the United States a reserve fund, the United States Patent and Trademark Fee Reserve Fund, where all funds collected in excess of the annual appropriation would be deposited in the account and would be available to the Office without further legislative action, to the extent and in the amount provided in the Office’s annual appropriations language, which enables the Office to access these funds during the fiscal year through a reprogramming action.

4 See United States House of Representatives Report accompanying H.R. 1249, the America Invents Act, Rept. 112-98 Part 1 pg. 49.

      

The Fund was established because the drafters of the legislation believed that the Office could operate more effectively if it had full access to all of its user fee-generated revenue such that the Office could keep all of the user fees until expended. The drafters also noted that since the early 1990’s more than $1 billion in user-fees paid to the Office for services were instead “diverted from the agency and spent on non-USPTO initiatives.”5

5 Id. pg. 55

      

Having been assured that the result would be a more stable funding environment and thereby the Office would be able to better plan for the future, PPAC was supportive of the enacting legislation.6 However, PPAC specifically noted concern over the possibility of the resurgence of fee diversion.7 Such resurgence, in the form of sequestration, has come to pass.

6 See Public Patent Advisory Committee Annual Report 2012, November 2, 2012. Pg. 15.; Public Patent Advisory Committee Annual Report 2012, September 24, 2012 Pg. 11-12 and http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/Patent%20Reform%20PDFS/CRPT-112hrpt98-pt1.pdf

7 Id. Public Patent Advisory Committee Annual Report 2012, September 24, 2012 Pg. 11-12.

      

2.    PPAC urges the Congress to Remove the Office from the Appropriations Process

      

A consistent funding stream and full access to user fees is essential to the operation of the Office. Given the failure of anti-fee diversion language to assure the Office full access to all user-fees, the PPAC (again) recommends that Congress develop an alternative funding and budget process for the Office. In the PPAC’s view, removing the Office from the appropriations process or creating a revolving fund are essential steps to permit the Office to develop multi-year planning and maintain Fee Reserve.8 While some events, such as the current implementation of sequestration, would still present a challenge to the agency, removing the office from the appropriations process or creation of a revolving fund as previously passed by the Senate would decrease the likelihood of this reoccurring problem of the unavailability of user fees.

8 PPAC understands the importance of the current Title 5 provisions. We think that these protections should remain intact.

      

3.    PPAC urges the Office to be More Cautious in Revenue Projection9

      

The Office is estimating a 6.0 percent patent filing growth level for FY 2015 and a 15.4 percent growth from FY 2013 to FY 2017.10 We encourage the Office to be more cautious in their predictions for growth in filing rates and utilization of new programs. Given activity in the courts11 and several proposed pieces of legislation that may have a downward force on filing, it is the PPAC’s opinion that projecting the growth in filing rates more conservatively will decrease the likelihood that mid-year adjustments are necessitated or that long-term goals require adjustment. Unlike concerns in the past, where any collections in excess of budget authority were lost to the Office without Congressional intervention, because of the AIA’s Fee Reserve Fund, revenue above the projected budget will remain available to the Office until expended and without fiscal year limitation. The Fee Reserve Fund is not a complete solution to fee diversion because it still requires Congress to appropriate USPTO access to the Fund. The current appropriations language permits reprogramming, however, it involves a year-to-year determination and could change in the future. The challenges of accurately forecasting user behavior over extended periods of time could be eliminated by Congress removing the USPTO from the appropriations process.

9 PPAC is not suggesting that the Office underestimate revenue projections. Currently the Office creates projections that articulate a range of projected revenue. PPAC is recommending that the Office spending plan consistently comport with the lower range of that spectrum.

10 http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/budget/fy13pbr.pdf pg. 12

11 See Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1296, 182 L. Ed. 2d 321 (2012); Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2107, 2114, 186 L. Ed. 2d 124 (2013); Ultramercial, LLC v. Hulu, LLC, 657 F.3d 1323, 1326 (Fed. Cir. 2011) cert. granted, judgment vacated sub nom. WildTangent, Inc. v. Ultramercial, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 2431, 182 L. Ed. 2d 1059 (U.S. 2012); and CLS Bank Int'l v. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 685 F.3d 1341, 1356 reh'g en banc granted, opinion vacated, 484 F. App'x 559 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The court's attention to patentable subject matter may decrease the incentives to file and/or decrease the allowance rate.

12 See proposals to address abusive patent litigation: H.R. 845, H.R. 2024, H.R. 2639, H.R. 2766, S. 866 and S. 1013. Reducing the ability to enforce and/or providing additional mechanisms to invalidate existing patents may reduce incentives to file.

      

4.    PPAC urges the Office to Prioritize Information Technology in 2014

      

The PPAC recognizes that the cuts to IT in 2013 were necessitated by the unanticipated sequestration requirement that the Office cut $148 million dollars from its FY 2013 budget. The PPAC does not dispute that the cuts to information technology were a reasonable action to minimize disruption in the face of sudden budget cuts. However, despite its appearance on the discretionary side of the balance sheet, fully functioning and up-to-date information technology systems are not a luxury in the 21st Century. Rather, it is a requirement for continuous improvement in reducing pendency, improving patent quality and empowering a growing and more technologically capable workforce.

      

The PPAC strongly believes that the information technology needs of the Office should be prioritized in the FY 2014 and FY 2015 budget. Quite simply, hiring more examiners is insufficient if the examiners’ productivity is hamstrung by antiquated information technology. Stabilization and enhancement of information technology is a mission critical activity that for the foreseeable future should be prioritized.

      

5.    PPAC urges the Office to Delay Satellite Offices until Sufficient Resources are Available

      

The PPAC believes that satellite offices are an essential component of an efficient and effective USPTO that serves the needs of its users. The PPAC supported this initiative by the Office. However, the realities of the sequestration clearly necessitate that core functions must be prioritized and the stresses of additional burdens should be deferred. While satellite offices will reap substantial benefits in the long term, we recognize that initial -start-up costs for creating these offices could be difficult to manage in the current fiscal environment. Therefore, we support the Administration and the USPTO working to routinely monitor fee collections, assess a new timetable that would help bring these projects online at a later date without undercutting core operations, and in interim, engaging in sustained outreach and stakeholder engagement in each community to the extent possible. The PPAC is in complete agreement with the Administration that until there are sufficient funds and a stable funding source, the Office should indefinitely delay all further expenditure of funds for the satellite offices that divert funds from mission critical core activities.

      

6.    PPAC urges all Stakeholders to Delay Additional Legislative and Executive Burdens on the Office Unless Full Access to User Fees is Restored

      

On June 4, 2013, the White House issued five executive actions and seven legislative recommendations to improve future innovation in high-tech patents, a key driver of economic growth and jobs. These initiatives were designed to protect inventors from frivolous litigation and ensure the highest-quality patents. Both are laudable goals with which PPAC and nearly all interested parties agree. However, so long as the sequestration is siphoning funds from the Office, the additional burdens articulated by the White House Task Force are of great concern. The five executive actions each require resources that are in short supply given the realities of the sequestration. Executive actions one, three and four (making “Real Party-in-Interest” the new default, empowering downstream users, and expanding dedicated outreached study) are information technology heavy activities. Mandating additional information technology activities concurrent with a reduction of nearly a quarter of the information technology budget is incompatible with maintenance of critical existing core activities.13 Changes that result in a decrease in revenue further compound the challenges under which the Office currently labors. PPAC recommends that the Administration restore the Office to full funding so that the Office can implement these important executive actions and proposed legislative actions.

13 $80 million was cut from the information technology budget representing a 23% reduction in the annual budget. However, due to the timing of the sequestration mid-year, the $80 million reduction applied to only six months of activities, not the full year. Thus the cuts were even more severe than the yearly percentage indicates.

II.      INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

A.      INTRODUCTION

In this section of the Report, the PPAC describes the Information Technology (IT) initiatives undertaken by the USPTO and the continued progress made this year in supporting the Office’s overall objectives and strategic goals. Under the direction of the Office of the Chief Information Officer (“OCIO”), the USPTO selects, integrates, implements and maintains information technology in support of improving patent quality, reducing pendency and backlog, advancing intellectual property leadership in the United States and internationally, and building and maintaining a 21st century work environment.

In 2012-2013, the OCIO continued its efforts to carry on this mission in the face of a dramatic mid-year budget reduction resulting from the combined effects of sequestration and financial factors described elsewhere in this report. As a “discretionary” center, the IT sector disproportionately bore the brunt of these cuts, with a particularly devastating impact on ongoing strategic technology initiatives. This section discusses the effects of the budget cuts as well as highlighting the OCIO’s accomplishments during the year.

B.      MISSION OF THE OCIO AND STRATEGIC IT OBJECTIVES

In alignment with the USPTO’s overall strategic goals of improving patent quality and reducing pendency, the OCIO is responsible for deploying and maintaining modern IT systems and infrastructure that improve quality and efficiency; for example, by helping examiners to work productively and effectively and by supporting communication and coordination with the user community and international stakeholders.

As the PPAC has reported in previous years, the Office has undertaken a set of modernization initiatives to drive these objectives, with a portfolio known as “Patents End to End” (PE2E) as its mainstay. PE2E, as its name indicates, is a set of IT systems aimed at streamlining the processing of patent documents and actions from their inception to their downstream archiving.

At its core, PE2E implements an advanced data architecture based on open, text-based industry standards such as the Extensible Markup Language (XML), moving away from proprietary, image-based approaches that are behind some of the USPTO’s legacy data-handling systems. In addition to offering opportunities for enhancements to patent quality (for example, through better search capabilities and consistency in office actions), the PE2E portfolio comprises part of the Office’s need to upgrade an aging IT infrastructure, a challenge faced by all large-scale organizations.

While many of the initiatives discussed here are aimed at IT modernization and improvement, and particularly focused on improving patent quality while maintaining efficiency, it is important to note that much of the IT budget must be devoted to creating and sustaining an up-to-date, stable, reliable and secure technology environment to support the work of employees and of the user community. The Office’s IT systems must, for example, quickly and efficiently process an increasing number of filings and other transactions, support examiner and user searches, and handle the workload of an increasingly “wired” and diverse community of stakeholders.

In 2013, the OCIO continued to support USPTO’s overall mission by modernizing technology and processes, stabilizing legacy technology systems, supporting the growth of the workforce as well as the geographic and global reach of the organization, and responding to changes driven by international agreements as well as to policy changes such as those implemented by the AIA. As a result, the Office had numerous continuing modernization initiatives as well as new internal and external requirements, which it had to conduct in the face of budget uncertainty. An independent verification and validation (IV&V) consultant retained by the USPTO concluded in 2013 that, while the Office has made significant progress, IT at USPTO must shift its emphasis from monitoring and reacting to continuous improvement. The PPAC agrees with this assessment, and notes that it may become increasingly difficult for OCIO to improve service and efficiency in the face of these changing and increasing demands without adequate budget growth and clarity of direction.

C.      MID-YEAR BUDGET REDUCTIONS

As discussed elsewhere in this Report, the USPTO underwent a series of budget setbacks in March and April of 2013. This resulted in a reduction of nearly $80 million in planned expenditures for IT for the remainder of the fiscal year. OCIO’s project portfolios bore a disproportionate burden from the cuts because a significant portion of the projects are deemed “discretionary” in that they are not linked to payroll expenditures or staffing, but rather rely heavily on outside contractors, and for this reason funds are not already committed and reductions can take effect quickly. Certainly, the Office did not have good options, and worked hard (and successfully) to avoid cuts that might have had a catastrophic impact on examiner productivity, retention and future revenue, for example.

However sound the rationale might be for eviscerating technology programs under the circumstances, the effect of the March and April reductions was a derailment of many technology improvements deemed essential for USPTO’s future. Eleven million dollars was cut from PE2E alone, representing over 60 percent of the planned activities for the remainder of the year in a portfolio that commands top billing in the Office’s strategic plan and is featured in the FY 2013 President’s Budget. Virtually all contractors were told to stop work. Most of the projects in the portfolio, including Text2PTO (see below), were put on hold indefinitely. Resources had to be shifted in order to deploy projects that were nearing completion.

The sheer dollars and percentages, while dramatic, actually understate the impact of the sudden reductions on IT. Some of the projects that were cut involved upgrades to aging systems, notably Patent Application Location and Monitoring (PALM), the backbone enterprise data system that handles all of the Office’s critical processes. Delaying upgrades not only increases the risk that legacy systems or their integrated components will fail, but also wastes resources by requiring suboptimal solutions to ongoing reliability issues. Furthermore, while the cuts could be implemented quickly, they cannot be reversed so easily. Most of the contractors involved in the strategic work had special knowledge and skills gained from development to date, and many will not be available if and when projects resume. This compounds the inevitable delays with procurements aimed at getting new contracts in place. The OCIO estimates a minimum of 18 months’ delay (probably more) due to the cutbacks.

While there were no immediate disastrous effects of the nearly $80 million in pullbacks – no major system failures, nor noticeable declines in patent quality or worker productivity, the PPAC believes that the delays in IT improvements resulting from the sequester have already put a damper on further progress in reducing pendency and improving quality, and that this may have been a contributing factor to the current plateau in the quality metric. The OCIO and other parts of USPTO should be recognized for continuing, in general, the improving trends in pendency and quality in the face of AIA, a rise in applications, and a volatile and uncertain budget environment. Yet the PPAC has no doubt that this situation will impede further gains and urges that work should resume on PE2E and other strategic IT initiatives.

D.      OCIO PROGRESS IN 2012-2013

Since our last Report, the PPAC has noted that substantial progress has been made in the following areas.

      

1.    Patent Examination Tools and Infrastructure

      

The Patent Examination Tools and Infrastructure projects include a set of integrated workflow, case management, viewing and search tools to help examiners work productively and effectively. Some examples of the new functionality included in these tools are advanced claims management (including claims tree and claims analysis), reference management, and the ability to search within a pending patent application. During 2012-2013, the tools were released in three stages to pilot groups representing all the technology centers in USPTO. Ongoing work includes further deployment, and enhancements including the integration with evolving PE2E tools (see below).

      

2.    Patents End-To-End (PE2E)

      

Patents End-To-End represents an extensive, multi-year portfolio of tools for improved processing of patent applications, based on a user-centered, agile-development methodology. The projects have included examiners and other stakeholders at all stages, resulting in a targeted set of features for managing and enhancing examination. The tools under development focus on core improvements, such as the migration from an image-centered to structured text-centered environment (allowing for better application integration and improved analytical and search capabilities), optimization to streamline and eliminate repetitive tasks, and architectural improvements to allow for improved scalability and reliability in the face of an ever-increasing workload.

      

In December 2012, an initial version of the PE2E tools was demonstrated for the USPTO at large and the public was invited, with a continued positive response from the examiner corps and public. As discussed above, the work was significantly slowed in March due to budget constraints. Portions of the PE2E work have continued, including, for example, the adaptation of the PE2E search tools for Chinese (SIPO) data, now deployed in the GPSN project discussed below.

      

3.    Patent Application Text Initiative (PATI)

      

During the PATI program, claims, specification, and abstracts of all active patent applications have been converted to structured text.  This currently accounts for approximately 21 million pages of documents, for which patent examiners have access from Office legacy IT tools. PATI will be the key source of data for PE2E’s new tools suite. The ongoing data capture conducted in PATI is in addition to the previously reported conversion of claims, specifications and abstracts of all active backfiles (63 million + documents), from image data to full XML4IP standard text. The Office has successfully completed all the hardware upgrades as part of the Infrastructure programs enabling corps-wide deployment of PATI data.

      

4.    Text to PTO (Text2PTO)

      

The Text2PTO program aims to allow and promote text submissions of patent applications from applicants. It will provide applicants with a suite of pre-submission tools to analyze and validate applications. Planning for Text2PTO began in 2012, and outreach to the intellectual property community has been conducted to vet different approaches, understand applicant needs, and communicate the advantages of text-based submission. Text2PTO was suspended this year as part of budget reductions.

      

5.    Global IT Systems

            

a.    Global Patent Search Network (GPSN)

            

As the first major step in allowing examiners to search a broad range of international patent data, the OCIO deployed functionality in 2013 to enable searching of Chinese patents provided by the Chinese State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) in XML format from 2008-2011. In addition to providing a framework for broader international patent search capabilities, the project provided a test bed for deployment of the new PE2E patent search system, which has been delayed as discussed above.

            

b.    One Portal Dossier

            

In 2013, the OCIO deployed functionality to transmit USPTO patent data to all IP5 offices (EPO, SIPO, KIPO, and JPO representing, Europe, China, Korea, and Japan). This facilitates work-sharing among patent offices internationally, with the aim of improving the quality of examined applications that are members of the same patent family and reducing duplication of effort.

            

c.    Cooperative Patent Classification

            

Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) is a partnership between the USPTO and the European Patent Office (EPO) to harmonize patent classification between offices under a single standard. Supporting this classification system required adaptations to legacy systems and data within the USPTO, which were made and deployed in 2013. Recently KIPO and SIPO announced their intentions to classify their respective patent documents using the CPC. The CPC will thus ultimately contain the patent document collections from four of the five offices of the IP5.

E.      COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE OCIO FOR 2014

The PPAC believes that IT development and modernization efforts at OCIO have produced valuable results in support of USPTO’s mission. The budget process this year blocked much of the progress toward continuous improvement and significantly threatened the ability of the Office to work efficiently and to support the expansion of the workforce and the application pool while improving quality and reducing pendency. The process for IT planning and budgeting must be improved in order for the Office to succeed, and the PPAC encourages the OCIO and USPTO to focus on the following areas:

      

1.    Provide increased funding

      

As discussed above, the dramatic mid-year cuts in 2013 have significantly compromised mission-critical IT systems at the Office and derailed modernization efforts aimed at improving quality and reducing pendency, among other strategic objectives. In order to reverse this and have a chance at catching up, significant increases in the IT budget are required for 2014.

      

2.    Protect IT from Future Cuts

      

The PPAC recognizes that many of the problems the OCIO faced in 2013 were the result of “trickle down” from legislative and administrative action. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO should adjust its planning so that adequate reserves are available for critical IT projects. Making long-term commitments to workforce and physical expansion can reduce these reserves and creates an imbalance between non-discretionary and discretionary spending. This is inefficient because it keeps the OCIO in a reactive position where it is unable to undertake and extend projects that improve quality and efficiency. Therefore, the Office must be cautious in the future about funding commitments that reduce flexibility when budget problems arise, particularly in the growth of the workforce and physical plant (e.g., field offices). The PPAC believes that IT modernization can create a more efficient, productive, and effective Office, and this is what is needed to meet the current and future objectives in the face of budget uncertainty.

      

3.    Resume and Accelerate Patents End-to-End

      

The PPAC believes that the PE2E portfolio has shown some good results and that the Office’s and Administration’s emphasis on this project is well-founded. PE2E is the centerpiece of OCIO’s effort to support the effectiveness of a modern examiner workforce, in synergy with the overall goals of reducing pendency and improving quality. The portfolio was brought to a virtual standstill in 2013 and must be resurrected, if not accelerated.

      

4.    Continue to Upgrade Legacy IT systems

      

While OCIO has made great progress in stabilizing IT systems, some of the systems, particularly PALM, continue to be threatened with obsolescence, resulting in threats to the organization as every system failure leads to productivity losses from a growing workforce. The Office must resume its efforts to modernize these systems.

      

5.    Expand support for the global IT community

      

Technology support for globalization, such as GPSN, One Portal Dossier, and CPC, were bright spots for OCIO in 2013. These projects must continue, as the USPTO moves forward with its vision of leading the world in intellectual property protection and policy.

      

6.    Continue to upgrade and expand links with stakeholders

      

While much of this report has focused on the role of IT in support of workforce productivity and effectiveness, the OCIO also plays a significant part in stakeholder service and in expanding links with the nation’s and world’s intellectual property community. Certain efforts, such as Text2PTO and enhancements to USPTO’s Website, were scaled back in 2013 and must be picked up again in the future.

III.      REQUEST FOR CONTINUED EXAMINATION

A.      INTRODUCTION

Requests for Continued Examination (RCEs), in both number and time to examination, continue to be a problem adversely affecting overall pendency and represent a source of frustration for both the Office and applicants. The number of RCEs awaiting action reached over 110,000 at mid-FY 2013. However, during FY 2013, Deputy Under Secretary, Teresa Rea; Commissioner for Patents, Peggy Focarino; and Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, Andrew Faile, dedicated significant attention to addressing the issues surrounding RCEs in an attempt to reduce this backlog and reduce the need for future filings.

Following the move of RCEs from the Examiner’s amended docket to the special continuing docket, the backlog of RCEs ballooned from about 17,000 in October of 2009 to over 110,000 in March of 2013 as can be seen in the chart below. As a result, the time between filing of the RCEs and the first office action rose from about two to three months to one to two years, representing a truly significant gap in the prosecution of “continued examination,” leading to increased applicant frustration and dissatisfaction.

RCE Backlog FY 2010 - FY 2013

RCEs raise a number of concerns for the PPAC: 1) The current hiatus between filing and start (or resumption) of examination is not efficient for either the USPTO or applicant; 2) Many practitioners believe the examiners force the filing of RCEs to obtain more credit instead of handling issues after final rejection. 3) The pendency of the first application ends with the filing of the RCE and subsequent prosecution time of the RCE is not captured in the Traditional Total Pendency statistic typically reported by the Office as pendency. This time is captured only in the Traditional Total Pendency Including RCEs statistic located on the USPTO dashboard when the RCE is finally acted upon. Therefore, the pendency numbers are misleading because RCEs comprise a significant proportion of the applications and their pendency is missing from the Traditional Total Pendency numbers. 4) Because RCEs are amended applications and not continuing applications, Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) begins 4 months after filing as compared to 14 months from filing for continuing applications and thus RCEs are accumulating significant PTA, which is not in the public interest. 5) RCEs are counted as new applications for inventory and placement on the examiner’s docket but treated as an amended case in other instances, which has contributed to the increasing backlog.

For the past few years, the USPTO has been working cooperatively with the PPAC to find initiatives which could alleviate some of the problems and reduce the need for filing RCEs. Two such programs implemented in FY 2012 are the After Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) and Quick Path IDS (QPIDS). The AFCP provides additional time for examiners to consider responses filed after a final rejection to determine whether the application can be put into condition for allowance and thus may avoid the need for an RCE or appeal. QPIDS provides an avenue for the consideration of newly discovered prior art after the payment of the issue fee, if certain conditions can be met. Both programs represent a step forward in creating options for applicants to avoid the need for filing an RCE. They were greeted with enthusiasm by practitioners as a very good start. The significant backlog of RCEs indicates that more efforts are necessary.

B.      NEW INITIATIVES

An early initiative implemented for reducing the need for RCEs is the After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0, which accords the examiner time for an interview and consideration of after final amendments following a request to take part in the program. At least 5,000 completed requests by applicants to participate in this program have already resulted in 1,534 allowances (as of mid-August 2013). This is a very encouraging outcome and the initiative is endorsed by the PPAC.

Responding to growing concerns voiced by the bar and the PPAC, the USPTO management emphasized the examination of RCEs and granted a temporary increase in the credit Examiners receive for the completion of an RCE from 1.75 counts to 2.0 counts, making it identical to other applications and continuations. Consequently, increases were reported in the numbers of RCEs being examined. The backlog of RCEs awaiting action dropped to about 96,000 by Mid-August of 2013, and was reduced to 78,272 by the end of September 2013.

In an effort to further stimulate action on the backlog of RCEs, USPTO and the Examiner’s union, Patent Office Professional Association (POPA), agreed to changes reordering work on the Examiner’s dockets, changes which will be implemented on October 1, 2013. These modifications simplify docket categories and time frames for completion of applications within each docket category. RCEs, regular new, Continuations, Continuations-in part (CIPs), and Divisionals will all be placed into a single docket called “New,” from which applications regularly will be identified for action based on the effective filing date. Examiners with higher RCE inventories will have more limited inventories of regular new applications available for action until their RCE inventories are reduced below a predetermined threshold. The first four RCEs done each quarter of the FY will receive 1.75 counts but subsequent RCEs completed during a quarter will then receive 2.0 counts. The PPAC is encouraged that these changes will spur further movement of RCEs and reduce the backlog.

Also, in alignment with the PTA goals of 14-4-4-4, the PPAC suggested setting a goal of taking up RCEs for action within 4 months of filing, which would reduce the PTA earned by an RCE compared to the currently reported delays. The USPTO is working with POPA to implement initiatives to achieve the goal of an average of 4 months to first action for RCEs. The PPAC appreciates the efforts by POPA and management to find ways to increase and speed the actions in RCEs. These actions, particularly the adoption of a goal to first action, will provide increased certainty on timing to first action, a goal that is certain to receive widespread enthusiasm and endorsement from the bar.

C.      RCE OUTREACH PROGRAM

To their credit, instead of relying on their own internal impressions and opinions or anecdotal concerns voiced by the PPAC and other individuals, the USPTO undertook an effort to capture feedback from a larger swath of the public and users. In conjunction with the PPAC, the USPTO sought comments through a Federal Register Notice and held a roundtable and focus session in Silicon Valley, Dallas, Chicago, New York City and Alexandria, Virginia, with one PPAC member attending each of these events. At these sessions, the USPTO RCE team demonstrated genuine openness and interest in understanding ideas and concerns raised by the public. The team collected over 1100 comments and suggestions from all sources, including IdeaScale®, comments to the Federal Register notice and the five roundtable/focus sessions. These comments were categorized into themes for the development of actions and initiatives and the USPTO Group Directors began developing actions to address each theme.

      

THEME 1:    RCE Education

      

Theme 1 for reducing the need for future RCE filings involves education of both the public and Examiners about the types and details of the currently available programs, which might be utilized to obtain consideration by the Examiner instead of just filing an RCE. A surprising statistic highlighted the need for more advertising of the current options because about 60% of RCEs had not had an amendment after final rejection. The USPTO has developed a timeline clearly showing the available options for each point in prosecution with links to the details of each program. This new feature has been made available on the Website. The PPAC was very pleased with the demonstrated features of this central information hub, including several ways to view the materials.

      

THEME 2:    Expansion of QPIDS Program

      

The action for Theme 2 involves a possible expansion of the QPIDS program to permit the certification under 37 CFR § 1.97(e) for information from a domestic filing. The current QPIDS program has received over 2,400 requests and avoided the need for an RCE in almost 1,700 cases. This is a significant improvement with clear benefits to both applicants and the Office. This potential expansion of the QPIDS program could increase the saving in reduced RCE filings. The PPAC applauds the USPTO for QPIDS and the possible expansion.

      

THEME 3:    Internal Training

      

Concepts consolidated into Theme 3 focused on training for supervisors and Examiners, stemming from received comments related to a need for more supervisory involvement and concerns about examination quality. The training proposed by the USPTO will focus on after final practice, compact prosecution, how to effectively review a case, how to better identify allowable subject matter, broadest reasonable interpretation of claims and one-on-one training for Examiners with high numbers of RCEs. Such training is valuable and hopefully will help reduce the numbers of RCEs by improving quality and providing a better avenue for supervisory intervention. However, the PPAC suggests some analysis following the training to judge whether or not the training has made any impact on the RCEs and public perceptions of patent quality.

      

THEME 4:    Prosecution Flexibility

      

An outcome for Theme 4 involves possible prosecution flexibility allowing more opportunities for applicant’s attorney and the Examiner to interact and communicate providing for better synchronization between the attorney and Examiner. These ideas include such items as providing additional opportunities and juncture points for interviews with examiners or the possibility of another action after a final rejection, The PPAC believes this is a positive approach which could reduce the numbers of actions in applications and reduce the need for RCEs stemming from a better understanding by applicant of the potential deficiencies or lack of clarity in the claims and a more complete understanding of the invention by the Examiner. This would represent a win-win situation for both parties, helping to resolve issues in applications sooner and reducing the filing of RCEs and appeals.

D.      RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC recommends exploring an avenue for resolution of issues in prosecution other than an appeal to the PTAB. One possible idea is permitting applicant participation in the pre-appeal brief conference or a new program which permits an interview with multiple primary examiners in addition to the examiner of record. Allowing applicants a voice in such initiatives would permit applicants to better present arguments and the Office to articulate underlying concerns perhaps not clear in the position taken by the Examiner. The presence of the Examiner and two other Examiners (a SPE, Quality Assurance Specialist (QAS) or a knowledgeable Primary Examiner) could clarify whether the application can be allowed or an appeal needs to be filed. In any case, it is believed that this could reduce the need for both RCEs and appeals to the PTAB.

The PPAC also recommends that the Office consider designating as final rejections, rejections over newly cited prior art when only minor amendments were made following a first office action. Compact prosecution and a complete search and first office action including all rejections that could have been made should be the goal of the Office. This, also, would likely reduce the necessity of filing some RCEs.

The identification of actions to address the problem of RCEs is an impressive first step and the PPAC recommends that USPTO continue to implement programs, training and actions to tackle this issue, but also monitor the outcomes of these actions to assess their effectiveness.

E.      CONCLUSIONS

Although RCEs continue to represent a concern for the PPAC, the impressive efforts by Deputy Under Secretary, Teresa Rea; Commissioner for Patents, Peggy Focarino; Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, Andrew Faile, and the RCE team are concentrated on flexible, creative initiatives to address the RCE problem. USPTO management is applauded for outstanding self-evaluation and identification of possible solutions. The cooperative work with the PPAC and the public on this issue demonstrates leadership and dedication to performance improvements by the USPTO management.

The PPAC endorses the actions taken to date on the RCE issue, which have translated to RCE backlog reductions and based on the progress witnessed in FY 2013, additional reductions are expected in FY 2014 stemming from these efforts. Given the magnitude of the RCE backlog, it will take some time to reach an acceptable backlog level and the goal of four months on average to a first action. Similarly, it will take some efforts by both examiners and practitioners to reduce the number of RCEs being filed. However, the PPAC applauds the significant actions taken this year by USPTO in gathering and beginning to address concerns raised by users. The PPAC is pleased to continue working with the USPTO addressing these issues.

IV.      HUMAN CAPITAL

A.      INTRODUCTION

Human capital remains a significant area of concern for the PPAC this year. During FY 2013, due in significant part to budget constraints, only 559 new examiners were hired instead of a planned 1000, representing a significant decrease from the 1507 new examiners hired during FY 2012. Furthermore, the planned hiring of 750 examiners in FY 2014 has been reduced in the President’s Budget to 250. The improving economy and the recent surge in new hires have also led to a higher attrition rate. In FY 2013, the preliminary attrition rate was 4.22 percent, compared to a 3.07 percent rate in FY 2012.

In light of the current hiring situation, the Office focused on hiring examiners with previous patent experience. The Office anticipated that such experienced patent professionals would require less training and thus would have the ability to start examining patent applications sooner. Of the 559 new examiners hired, 51 are IP experienced patent professionals and 21 design examiners. This compares to the 148 experienced examiners hired in 2012.

In 2012, the first Satellite Office in Detroit, Michigan opened for business, and by the end of FY 2013, 101 patent examiners and PTAB judges were hired and trained at the new facility. Satellite Offices in Dallas, Denver, and the Silicon Valley were also announced, however, there was no patent examiner hiring of examiners for these offices in FY 2013, and hiring in 2014 is on hold.

As a result, the PPAC strongly recommends that the Office be given full access to the user fees it generates to allow for the hiring of at least 750 new examiners in FY 2014, and look to hire the appropriate number of examiners in FY 2015 necessary to continue to reduce pendency. Further, the PPAC recommends continuing to target experienced patent professionals for the available new examiner positions and to advance distributed work force initiatives to attract a larger pool of well-qualified candidates and further enhance retention of experienced examiners for an entire career.

B.      EXAMINER HIRING AND RETENTION

The Office set an initial goal of hiring 1000 new examiners in 2013. Due in significant part to budget constraints, only 559 new examiners were hired, of which 51 were experienced hires. The attrition rate increased from 3.07% to 3.94%; however, this is still significantly lower than the attrition rates; experienced in 2009 and 2010. By comparison, the attrition rate for FY 2009 was 6.3% (5.6% excluding transfers and retirees). While the Office continues to focus on a number of initiatives to increase retention and employee satisfaction, it is also important to note that the attrition rate is historically lower during more challenging economic conditions. Accordingly, the PPAC recommends that the Office continue to focus on initiatives to further reduce attrition and keep experienced, productive examiners.

Fiscal Year

New Hire Goal

Actual New

Hires

Examiner

Attrition

Total Number of

Examiners

Net Change

(Year-Over-Year)

2013

500

559

373

7,958

127

2012

1500

1,496

280

7,831

1,146

2011

1200

836

223

6,685

557

2010

350

276

277

6,128

-17

The PPAC believes that it is imperative to increase the number of examiners hired and to continue to maintain the low attrition rates to allow the examiner ranks to grow to appropriate levels. The Office has set a revised goal of hiring 750 examiners in FY 2014, if sufficient funding is available.

Attracting and maintaining a skilled corps of examiners is critical to effective examination of applications and reducing backlog. The PPAC strongly recommends that the Office be provided sufficient funding to hire enough examiners to maintain appropriate levels in FY 2014.

C.      EFFECTS OF UNCERTAINTY IN BUDGETS ON HIRING

Funding, and specifically the Sequester, has had a substantial impact in hiring during FY 2013.

Roughly 80% of the Office’s budget is non-discretionary (payroll and overhead), and the Office’s ability to react to the Sequester was therefore limited. As a result, during FY 2013, the Office needed to significantly reduce its hiring goals. Only 559 new examiners were hired in FY 2013, falling far short of the original goal of hiring 1000 new examiners.

Illustrated below is the projected impact of the hiring uncertainty on pendency to first action, measured in months:

EXAMINER HIRING AND RETENTION

D.      INITIATIVES TO INCREASE EXAMINATION CAPACITY

In light of the recent budget constraints, the Office has instituted and furthered a number of initiatives to make the most of its current Examiner Corps. Several of these initiatives are described below:

      

1.    Develop Hiring of Experienced Patent Professionals

      

During FY 2010, the Office initiated a new hiring model to encourage individuals with previous patent experience to apply for a position as a patent examiner. This model was intended to place more emphasis on recruiting candidates with significant patent experience while previous hiring focused more on technical background/experience. The hope is that experienced patent professionals would require less training and thus would have the ability to start examining patent applications sooner.

      

Since 2010, the Office has consistently been able to hire experienced patent professionals. In FY 2013, the Office added 51 on top of the 148 it hired in 2012. Since this program began, the Office has added 355 new examiners with previous patent experience. The PPAC encourages the Office to continue with this program.

      

2.    Target Overtime and Backlog Areas

      

The Office has used overtime as an efficient way to manage its workload and reduce the backlog of applications in the absence of additional examiner hires. During FY 2013, the Office prioritized the use of overtime to targeted areas with the highest backlogs. The Office expects 125 hours of overtime per examiner, per year. This is obviously dependent on the budget, however, the PPAC believes that judicious use of overtime and incentives can be helpful in reducing the backlog of applications.

      

3.    Nationwide Workforce

      

The Office has been successful in developing a nationwide workforce. The USPTO’s workforce consists of employees that work at locations other than the Alexandria headquarters, thus allowing employees to choose where they desire to live. This segment of USPTO employees either participate in the patents hoteling program (PHP) or work from the USPTO satellite office in Detroit.

      

There are currently 3573 examiners that participate in PHP. This is comprised of two segments -- employees whose worksite is within 50 miles from the Alexandria campus and those with a worksite greater than 50 miles from the Alexandria campus. 63% of eligible examiners and 45% of all examiners work remotely in the hoteling program.

      

The PPAC recommends that the Office continue to support, promote, and expand the Patents Hoteling Program (PHP), which permits examiners to work from remote locations.

      

Further, the PPAC supports the Telework Enhancement Act Pilot Program (TEAPP) that provides more flexibility regarding employee travel requirements. In 2010, the USPTO received authorization to conduct the TEAPP program and gather data on its effectiveness. Participation slots were limited. In 2012, the first USPTO hoteling employees enrolled in TEAPP. Management recently reached agreement with the bargaining units to expanded participation in the pilot program (TEAPP), and there are 1455 participation slots allotted for POPA bargaining unit members and 91 participation slots for NTEU 243. Currently, 1212 Patent examiners and 13 TSS employees participate in the pilot program.

      

As the USPTO transitions to a more virtual work environment, the Patent organization established a permanent hoteling program for its Supervisory Patent Examiners (SPEs) and Management QAS (MQAS) In July 2013; approximately 110 managers began working from home full-time.  The program is continually monitored and adjusted as necessary in order to meet the program objectives of retaining skilled managers while also ensuring they remain an effective part of the Office’s engaged workforce.

      

In addition, the Office has expanded the Patents Telework Program (PTP) to allow workers at the Alexandria campus to work up to 32 hours per pay period at an approved alternate worksite.

      

The PPAC commends the Office’s use of these progressive initiatives. The flexibility of these teleworking programs has improved job satisfaction and morale and lessened the impact of attrition on the workforce.

      

4.    On-Hold Programs

      

The Sequester has had an impact on a number of promising programs at the Office. A few of these include the after-hours technical and legal studies programs, the examiner site visit program (SEE), and technical and legal training. These programs allow employees to take law school courses and technical courses to enhance their legal and technical knowledge, allow examiner opportunities to visit companies to gain technical knowledge in their areas of expertise which enhances their patent examination duties, and provides for ongoing technical and legal development for examiners. These programs have all been reduced.

E.      SUMMARY OF PPAC RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC recommends that the Office be given sufficient funding as soon as possible to allow for the hiring of at least 1000 new examiners in FY 2014. The PPAC believes that the current trend of insufficient hiring due to funding will have a significant and lasting impact on the Office if not remedied immediately. Additionally, the PPAC recommends continuing to target experienced IP professionals for the available new examiner positions and to advance geographical expansion of the work force and telework initiatives to attract a larger pool of well qualified candidates and further enhance retention of experienced examiners for an entire career.

V.      PATENT QUALITY

A.      INTRODUCTION

The issuance of high quality patents with a reasonable pendency remains the most important priority for the USPTO. Stakeholders must be able to rely on the validity of issued patents with a high degree of certainty, and applicants benefit from timely decisions and from obtaining patent rights while the invention is commercially viable in the marketplace.

The USPTO made positive strides in patent quality during FY 2013. Significantly, the Office held a number of well-attended outreach meetings with stakeholders to discuss issues related to the quality of software patents. The Office continued to review, and where appropriate, streamlined the patent process to advance patent prosecution on the merits. In particular, the Office focused significantly on after-final practice and revamped its after-final consideration pilot program. The Office continued to focus on expanding the use of the Track One program to expedite the review of applications deemed important by applicants to, e.g., obtain a patent to help finance a new business or to stave off competition. The Office also focused on several “clarity of record” initiatives to ensure applicants clearly define the aspects of their inventions and examiner’s use, e.g., of Section 112 rejections to clarify the meaning of certain claim recitations. These initiatives are ongoing and offer significant promise. The USPTO’s Office of Patent Quality Assurance continued its role as the internal arbiter of patent quality, by measuring patent quality throughout the examination process. These efforts are described in more detail below.

There are still a number of areas in need of improvement but the Office has shown a willingness to embrace change. The PPAC is certain the Office will continue to focus on ways to improve patent quality and decrease pendency.

B.      PATENT QUALITY OUTREACH

The Office held two software patent quality meetings in February 2013, one in Silicon Valley and one in New York. The Silicon Valley meeting included 12 speakers and approximately 250 attendees in total (150 live, 100 via webcast). The New York meeting included 14 speakers and approximately 200 attendees (120 live, 80 via webcast). The speakers were from a diverse background and included law professors, patent practitioners, in-house attorneys, independent software developers, and software coalitions. The meetings provided a forum for the public to offer input on enhancing the quality of software-related patents through implementing best practices in patent application preparation and utilizing existing statutory framework to improve examination. Although the meetings focused on the quality of software patents, the Office emphasized that any lessons learned would be applied to patent applications in every technological field and to the entire examination process.

Each meeting focused on establishing clear boundaries for claims that use functional language and employing certain techniques in the preparation and prosecution of patent applications. The common discussion points included Section 112, paragraph (a) requirements directed to written description and enablement, paragraph (b) requirements directed to indefiniteness, and paragraph (f) requirements directed to functional claiming. In conjunction with these meetings, the Office published a Federal Register notice in early January 2013 that requested written comments based on this initiative and patent quality meetings; 98 comments were received by the Office in response to questions posed in the Federal Register notice. The Office has reviewed these comments and has started implementing examiner training to identify claim limitations that invoke Section 112 (f) and to make the patent examination record clear. In addition, the Office has scheduled follow-up meetings with stakeholders in October 2013, one on October 17, 2013, at the University of California Berkeley School of Law in Berkeley, California, and a second meeting at the USPTO to continue the dialogue on ways to improve patent quality.

The PPAC commends the Office for having these meetings. The feedback that PPAC members received from the meetings was overwhelmingly positive and demonstrated how useful face-to-face USPTO communications are with stakeholders. The PPAC urges the Office to continue these outreach efforts. However, the PPAC is concerned that sequestration will limit the Office’s ability to provide funding for these important meetings.

C.      PATENT QUALITY COMPOSITE

As a quality measure, the USPTO has implemented a “Patent Quality Composite,” as shown in the table below. The quality composite is composed of seven individual factors, including internal USPTO measures of the quality of actions setting forth the final disposition, the quality of actions during the course of examination and perceived quality of the patent process from both an external and an internal perspective. Including more items in the quality measurement is an important step in the right direction.

Percent FY 15 Target Achieved

However, the PPAC believes that more concrete, objective statistics should be considered for inclusion in the composite. Additionally, reporting a percentage of achievement of a goal renders the number difficult to evaluate. Anecdotally, the PPAC believes that users continue to be uncertain about the quality measurements being reported by the USPTO in this composite. As noted in the RCE roundtables and focus sessions, there were a number of concerns raised about the quality of the examination. Exactly how this comports with internal measures is not clear, but these comments from stakeholders flag a need for improvement in patent quality. The PPAC continues to be willing to work with the USPTO to refine quality metrics.

D.      RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC commends the Office for expanding data collection capabilities in its quality review program to permit collection of data on application characteristics and examination behaviors with a greater degree of granularity. According to the Office, data collected includes: the occurrence of functional claims in computer-related inventions; occurrence of claims that invoke 112 (f), and documentation of such claims by examiner and/or applicants; analysis of the basis for Section 101 non-statutory subject matter rejections (e.g. abstract idea, natural phenomenon, law of nature, signal, software per se, etc.); as well as other items. In addition, the PPAC commends the Office for updating the uspto.gov website to include content that will increase transparency with respect to the quality metrics and how they are generated, and will increase stakeholder understanding of the Patent Quality Composite. The content includes a computer-based training module that provides an explanation of the Patent Quality Composite and each of the component metrics. The Office has emphasized the inclusion of patent examination quality as a factor for consideration in various program evaluations. In FY 2013, data collection and measurement protocols were constructed to identify and monitor potential quality impacts resulting from programs/initiatives such as SPE hoteling, third-party submissions, and examiner-initiated interviews.

The PPAC recommends that the quality composite include more items which are objective to provide a quality evaluation which might be deemed more transparent by some individuals. Also, providing examples of how a patent application is scored for errors in the quality evaluation would be helpful.

VI.      PATENT PENDENCY

A.      INTRODUCTION

The USPTO continued to decrease pendency to first action and total pendency during FY 2013 with achieving 29.1 months for total pendency and 18.2 months for pendency to first action. This reflects a reduction from FY 2012’s 32.4 months and 21.9 months, respectively, which are laudable improvements, showing significant progress towards the goals of 10 months pendency to first action and 20 months total pendency.

Instrumental in these gains were a focus on moving the oldest new applications, hiring of new examiners, and several programs, including Track One, and the Patent Prosecution Highway, implemented by the USPTO.

B.      SEQUESTRATION

One significant implication of the sequestration is a negative impact on pendency. The USPTO, while an appropriated agency, does not receive tax-payer money; it is a fee-based organization. When applicants submit patent applications, they provide fees for the services they expect to be rendered. To encourage filing of applications, the fees are back-end loaded but the costs to perform the activities of examination fall more heavily on the front-end of prosecution. Consequently, the USPTO has the applications requiring work to be done, but with sequestration does not have the money to actually perform the work. The pendency of patent applications achieved by the USPTO is dependent upon the number of patent examiners at the agency able examine the filed patent applications. Decisions must be made on how to allocate less money than was generated by the fees and often the hiring of new patent examiners is cut because in reality very little of the USPTO budget is discretionary. Because of sequestration, the USPTO reduced the number of patent examiners hired in FY 2013 and projects a reduction in hires for FY 2014. Having fewer examiners translates into increased pendency, resulting in significant increases in pendency for years. Note the significant impact the number of hired patent examiners during FY 2013 has had on pendency to first action in the chart below.

Projected Effects of Numbers of Examiner Hires on Pendency to First Action, Measured in Months

Projected Effects of Numbers of Examiner Hires on Pendency to First Action, Measured in Months

Based on the 1500 examiners expected to be hired in FY 2013, the model showed a reduction of pendency to first action of 8.0 months. However, with only 559 actual hires in FY 2013, the model shows first action pendency at 11 months in FY 2020. One year of sequestration has a negative impact on pendency but multiple years of sequestration for the fee-based USPTO would have serious consequences. Sequestering fees paid to the agency for work that must be completed creates examination delays and undermines the substantial progress achieved to date, inhibiting the ability of entrepreneurs to leverage their granted patents and create jobs.

It is vitally important to hire patent examiners, at least at a replacement level, in order to continue reducing the pendency of patent applications. Without hiring enough examiners, the total number of examiners in the USPTO will decrease due to attrition, slowing the reduction of the pendency and eventually allowing pendency to begin to increase again.

C.      AFTER FINAL CONSIDERATION PILOT

In FY 2013, the Office received input from stakeholders and examiners obtained through the RCE outreach initiative and revamped its after final consideration pilot (AFCP). The Office launched version 2.0 of the AFCP on May 19, 2013. The purpose of AFCP 2.0 is to increase efforts towards compact prosecution and increased collaboration between examiners and stakeholders. As with the original AFCP pilot, the new AFCP 2.0 pilot allows additional flexibility for applicants when they receive an “after-final” rejection in an Office Action. AFCP 2.0 authorizes additional time (approximately 3 hours) for examiners to search and consider responses filed by applicants after final rejection. The examiners use the additional time to review the after-final response and conduct an updated prior art search. The version 2.0 of the AFCP requires that an applicant include an amendment to at least one independent claim that does not broaden its scope.

The PPAC applauds the Office’s willingness to review existing programs like the original AFCP and to make changes to them to improve the program’s performance. The PPAC urges the Office to explore additional ways to get the word out about the AFCP 2.0 program to both stakeholders and examiners.

D.      TRACK ONE (PRIORITIZED EXAMINATION)

Implementation of Track One, an AIA-mandated expedited examination program, began on September 26, 2011. Although the Office designed the program to accept just 10,000 requests, as of August 12, 2013, the Office has received only 5,838 requests. The additional cost of $4,800 (for large entities) was considered too high. The PPAC credits the Office for recognizing this and reducing the fee to $4,000. For an applicant needing quick examination, the program offers significant advantages. The Office takes the goal of completion of examination in twelve months seriously and as a result examination proceeds at a very rapid pace. It appears that the Office works more closely with an applicant to identify allowable subject matter and is open to meaningful interviews and productive discussions to advance prosecution. Based on recent statistics, the average amount of days from petition grant to allowance is only 148 days, significantly faster than regular prosecution. Forty-seven percent of all Track One filings are made by small entities, i.e., likely startups that need patents to get the critical financial funding they need to grow their business.

The PPAC is concerned that the Track One program is not used more often by applicants. In an effort to expand the Track One program, the PPAC urges the Office to consider some changes that may enhance applicant participation. The PPAC recommends that Track One request be allowed one year after filing the application thereby negating the current requirement that the request be submitted with the original filing. The PPAC requests that the Office review when an application in Track One remains in special status and consider ways to allow these applications to stay in special status for a longer period of time. By “special status,” the PPAC recommends that the Office act promptly on any applicant responses (e.g., one month) to advance prosecution. In addition, the PPAC recommends that the USPTO fee for requesting Track One after receiving an RCE, whose parent was already in Track One, be made lower than the full cost of a Track One request.

E.      PATENT PROSECUTION HIGHWAY (PPH)

The various versions of the PPH (i.e. original PPH, PCT-PPH and Mottanai PPH) offered by the USPTO have assisted in reducing the pendency for individual applications, reduced costs for applicant and improved quality. These programs are a model of international cooperation providing benefits to both applicants and the participating patent offices. As a consequence of the work-sharing among patent offices, the applications have a higher allowance rate and fewer actions compared to non-PPH applications. PPAC is pleased that the USPTO is working towards a plurilateral unitary program which will simplify the existing program into one single program.

F.      TRAINING AND INITIATIVES

Any effort by the USPTO, stakeholders, or the PPAC to enhance patent quality and reduce pendency has to include a training platform. The Office is committed to training examiners and providing information to stakeholders on its Website, via roundtable meetings and webcasts to educate applicants on the USPTO programs to enhance patent quality and reduce pendency.

The PPAC applauds the USPTO for the guidelines it continues to provide for examiners and by extension, to the users regarding new case law developments. These guidelines are extremely helpful for stakeholders to understand how the changing law should be applied, and especially, by providing examples in which examiner rejections should not be made.

The PPAC commends the Office for implementing eSTATS which is a centralized reporting system that gives examiners the ability to view their key quality-related data points relative to art unit and technology center averages. In addition, the QIR/eSTATS training for SPEs has been enhanced to assist the SPEs in monitoring the quality of the examiner’s work product. Moreover, the Office continues to provide examiner training with respect to conducting interviews, the myriad of changes under the AIA, training to identify claims that invoke 112 (f), and initiatives to make the patent examination record clear. The PPAC urges the Office to continue these efforts and after the training, evaluate its effectiveness. It is not the training, per se, which should be the objective but the results and improvements in examiner’s application of the lessons learned during the training.

G.      RECOMMENDATIONS

In addition to the recommendations discussed above for each program, the PPAC recommends that the USPTO perform evaluations of two programs to identify compliance: 1) restriction requirements and 2) finality of rejections. The PPAC recommends that the Office do an evaluation of restriction requirements to determine what percentage of the restrictions comply with the MPEP. For example, during one pay period, all mailed restriction requirements could be reviewed for compliance with the MPEP. Also, the RCE Focus Sessions and Roundtables highlighted a concern about final rejections being premature. Compliance with the rules could be evaluated on a random sample of finals. The PPAC also urges the USPTO to measure how many final office actions are made with rejections based on prior art newly cited by the examiner with particular attention being given to those applications in which relatively minor amendments were made to the claims. Although pendency is a very high priority for applicants, ensuring that the USPTO can accomplish their work is essential. Because the Office is reliant on electronic systems to complete the examination and maintain the file wrapper, loss of those systems would be catastrophic because little to no work could be done without the essential IT systems. It is not only the Office that relies on these systems, Applicants file 98% of applications electronically and rely on Private/Public PAIR to access and view file wrappers. Over the past few years, the IT budget has borne the brunt of budget cuts and the fragile, outdated system has been repaired, maintained and coaxed to continue functioning far past its expected lifetime. Should the budget not permit full funding of all programs at the USPTO, the PPAC recommends that the patent examiner hiring be implemented at least at a replacement level in order to avoid increases in pendency. The PPAC further recommends that funding the IT system be prioritized over the hiring of any additional patent examiners beyond replacement levels in FY 2014.

VII.      PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD (PTAB)

A.      INTRODUCTION

The AIA established the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) on September 16, 2012. The Chief Judge of the PTAB is James Donald Smith.

The Board's responsibilities include: reviewing adverse decisions from Examiners upon applications for patents pursuant to section 134(a); reviewing reexamination appeals pursuant to section 134(b); conducting derivation proceedings pursuant to section 135; and conducting covered business method (“CBM”) patent and inter partes reviews (“IPR”) pursuant to chapters 18 and 31 of the AIA.

The Board also continues to decide patent interferences pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 135.

B.      BOARD STAFF

As of September 23, 2013, the Board includes 177 judges. Although staffing of the satellite offices with patent examiners has been delayed as a consequence of the sequestration, each of the satellite offices does include PTAB judges. More specifically, the Dallas office has five judges, the Silicon Valley office has eight judges, the Denver office has eight judges, and the Detroit office has ten judges. The placement of these satellite offices around the country has expanded the ability of the Board to employ qualified individuals to meet the growing workload faced by the PTAB. The Board continues to review candidates and plans on hiring additional judges in FY 2014.

C.      BOARD BACKLOG

The backlog of ex parte appeals pending at the Board stands at 25,554 applications, down from a peak of 26,896 applications in February 2013. The growth of the backlog has been halted for now as more decisions were issued by the Board as compared to new appeals received by the Board in the last six months. That trend is encouraging for now, but the Board will need to remain vigilant to ensure the backlog does not increase if the ex parte appeal and AIA intake grow faster than new judge hires.

The Board continues to implement a per curiam process, whereby certain appeals can be decided based on arguments by the Examiners or Appellants in the written record. These per curiam decisions are shorter and generally disposed faster than other appellate decisions. In fiscal year 2012, the PTAB issued 142 per curiam decisions; in fiscal year 2013, the PTAB issued 136 per curiam decisions; and in fiscal year 2014, through early October 2013, the PTAB issued 6 per curiam decisions. PPAC recommends continued use of per curiam decisions but emphasizes that the written record must sufficiently explain the facts and law in the case.

The Board has affirmed or affirmed-in-part 68%, reversed 29%, and remanded or dismissed about 3% of the Examiner’s decisions. These statistics are consistent with the affirmance, reversal, and remand/dismissal rates of previous years and demonstrate the Board’s willingness, at least in about 1/3 of the cases before the Board, to reverse the Examiner’s decision when appropriate to do so. In addition, the PPAC is encouraged by the low numbers of remands and dismissals, which indicates that the Patent Examining Corps provides complete Examiner’s Answers to the PTAB.

D.      AIA PROGRESS

As of September 26, 2013, the Board received 580 total petitions – 522 inter partes review proceedings (IPRs), 56 covered business method proceedings (CBMs), one post grant review proceeding (PGR) (filed in error), and one derivation proceeding. The majority of the petitions were in the electrical/computer software area. In particular, the petition filings by area of technology were: 68.7% electrical/computer software; 13.8% mechanical; 9.3% chemical; 7.3% biotechnology/pharmaceutical; and 0.9% design. With respect to IPRs and CBMs, patent owners have submitted 247 preliminary responses and waived their rights to submit a preliminary response in 61 cases. The PPAC is pleased with the patent owner’s usage of preliminary responses and waivers as these options were not available in ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings. In addition, of the 247 cases in which an IPR or CBM has been instituted, 61 settlements have been reached. The PPAC also finds the use of settlements encouraging as this option also was not available in ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings. Lastly, the AIA proceedings are still in their infancy so the PTAB has only rendered one final written opinion in a CBM proceeding, none yet in an IPR proceeding.

PTAB has been very busy since it started formally accepting petitions in September 2012. A comparison of the number of PTAB petitions to district court filings involving patent litigations in 2012 highlights this point. PTAB received 564 petitions from September 2012 to September 30, 2013; in all of 2012, 1,266 complaints were filed in the Eastern District of Texas, 995 in the District of Delaware, 514 in the Central District of California, and 260 in the northern District of California. As expected, the number of filings in FY 2013 was 564, thereby putting PTAB behind only two Federal district courts in terms of patent disputes that they are handling.

E.      CHALLENGES MOVING FORWARD

With the implementation of the AIA, the PTAB was statutorily required to handle significantly more work and provide entirely new services for new programs, and at about the same time, the sequestration made unavailable some of the fees paid by users to the USPTO. PPAC has concerns with the resources provided to PTAB especially in light of sequestration and its continuing adverse impact on the Office. In particular, the PTAB’s pipeline is continuing to grow, with new petition filings coming into the Office at an increased rate, and PTAB’s need to provide initial determinations to grant or deny these petitions within a statutory deadline. In addition, starting in October and November of 2013, the PTAB will have to review the trials, final hearings, and final dispositions from the IPR and CBM petitions filed at the end of 2012. Moreover, the appeals from the Central Reexamination Unit involving existing ex parte and inter partes reexaminations are expected to be robust for the remainder of 2013 and in 2014, requiring additional PTAB resources. Furthermore, although the PPAC and stakeholders continue to focus on the new AIA proceedings, PTAB needs to continue to be vigilant at lowering the ex parte appeal backlog, now around 26,000. Lastly, there is legislation pending in Congress that would expand CBM proceedings by eliminating the financial product restriction and eight-year sunset provision, each of which would require additional PTAB resources. PPAC feels strongly that the USPTO should be accorded full access to all user fees so that they may do the work with high quality and in the statutorily required time frames.

The PPAC commends the PTAB’s efforts to provide information on its Website with respect to the new AIA proceedings. In particular, the PTAB has established a Published Cases Committee to review decisions to determine which ones are representative, informative, or precedential, and to post them on the PTAB Website. In addition, the PTAB has been providing regular updates at PPAC meetings and other USPTO events to provide the latest statistics and developments involving the new AIA proceedings. The PPAC urges the PTAB to continue this dissemination of information because the AIA proceedings are new, and consequently, there are plenty of open questions involving, e.g., the extent of discovery, estoppel, settlements, and related matters.

VIII.      LEGISLATION

A.      INTRODUCTION

After the tumultuous and highly productive period of the last several years, during the passage and implementation of the America Invents Act, and the advent of USPTO-led fee setting (for which, the PPAC played a significant role), patent-related legislation considered in Congress over the last year has focused on addressing so-called abusive patent infringement litigation. The Administration, including the Department of Commerce and the USPTO, and key members of Congress contend that frivolous patent infringement litigation and threats of litigation by certain patent-holding companies, certain of which may have a business model that only involves litigating their patents, is a significant threat to American innovators and start-ups. Various terms have been used for such companies: non-practicing entities (NPEs), patent monetization entities (PMEs), patent assertion entities (PAEs), or patent licensing entities (PLEs)---we’ll use the non-pejorative PLE throughout the remainder of this discussion.

Some have argued that the potential high costs of litigation are sometimes used by PLEs as a hammer to force settlements with small businesses and start-ups which do not have the financial resources to effectively respond. Others argue that PLEs provide a useful and innovative market solution, serving as intermediaries between those who create valuable intellectual property and others who use or build upon patented IP.

A variety of administrative and legislative actions have been proposed to limit abusive litigation and threats of litigation. These various efforts appear now to be focusing on particular abusive behaviors and not the status of a particular company as “practicing” or “non-practicing”, since significant companies have noted that they and their competitors may at particular times, with particular patents in their portfolio, be considered “practicing” or “non-practicing” entities.

B.      WHITE HOUSE EXECUTIVE ACTIONS AND LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES

The White House announced in June a number of targeted executive actions and legislative priorities.  The executive actions include ensuring transparency as to patent ownership, tightening patent examiner review standards, helping small entities cope with settlement demands and litigation threats, and expanding educational outreach. The USPTO has been charged with the lead responsibility for implementing these actions. As noted below, and elsewhere, the PPAC remains deeply concerned that a significant amount of voluntarily paid user fees are being syphoned away from the Office, reducing hiring, terminating IT contracts, and reducing the ability of the Office to actually do its current job. Adding further USPTO requirements, studies and implementation of new regulations (such as proposed by the White House) at a time when sequestration is in effect, is a cause of significant concern to PPAC.

The White House also expressed support for legislation to improve the efficiency of patent litigation.  The legislative measures recommended include requiring applicants to fully disclose ownership of patents, promoting a “loser pays” approach (to shift the costs of litigation to the losing party) in frivolous litigation, expanding the types of patents subject to USPTO’s current covered business method review, and protecting downstream users from initial infringement claims.  

We understand that USPTO has been engaging stakeholders to provide updates on the implementation of the executive actions and facilitating further discussion of the nature of particular problems and appropriate ways of addressing it, whether through legislative or administrative means.

C.      CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGS

Congressional efforts have included targeted hearings and an array of proposed legislation.

Congressional hearings conducted include:

Abusive Patent Litigation: The Impact on American Innovation & Jobs, and Potential Solutions” - March 14, 2013, House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet
Abusive Patent Litigation: The Issues Impacting American Competitiveness and Job Creation at the International Trade Commission and Beyond” – April 16, 2013, House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet
Patent Reform implementation and New Challenges for Small Businesses” – May 15, 2013, House Committee on Small Business
Standard Essential Patent Disputes and Antitrust Law” – July 30, 2013, Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights

D.      PENDING LEGISLATION

H.R. __, DISCUSSION DRAFT (Rep. Goodlatte, R-VA-6) – circulated as amended on 9/6/2013 – Which includes a wide range of litigation-related and other provisions, e.g., fee shifting, RPI, expand CBM , now replaced by H.R. 3309.
H.R. 845, “Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes” (SHIELD) Act of 2013 (Rep. DeFazio, D-OR-4) – introduced: 2/27/2013 – Fee shifting
H.R. 2024, “End Anonymous Patents Act” (Rep. Deutch, D-FL-21) – introduced: 5/16/2013 - Patent owner disclosure and RPI
H.R. 2639, “Patent Litigation and Innovation Act” (Reps. Jefferies, D-NY-8, Farenthold, R-TX-27) – introduced: 7/10/2013 - Heighten pleading standards, joinder, stays, discovery, Rule 11 sanctions
H.R. 2766, “Stopping the Offensive Use of Patents (STOP) Act” (Reps. Issa, R-CA-49, Chu, D-CA-27) - introduced 7/22/2013 – Expand CBM and pro bono efforts
S.866, “Patent Quality Improvement Act of 2013” (Sen. Schumer, D-NY) – introduced: 5/6/2013 – Expand CBM
S. 1013, “Patent Abuse Reduction Act of 2013” (Sen. Cornyn, R-TX) – introduced: 5/21/2013 – Litigation-related provisions, loser pays, RPI, discovery, joinder

E.      RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC will continue to monitor and consult with the USPTO as the legislative and administrative processes continue to address abusive activities. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO ensure that any proposed administrative changes are appropriately and narrowly targeted for any such alleged abuse without unduly harming our overall patent system, the smooth operation of the examination process, the quality of patents issued, or the overall costs and burdens to applicants.

The PPAC remains concerned that the OMB has made the determination that USPTO user-fees are also subject to sequestration. The PPAC recommends that the USPTO continue to work with the Administration and Congress to ensure that the USPTO has access to all of its fees.

The PPAC is interested in monitoring whether any legislative options will be proposed to address what the PPAC believes is a very serious undermining of the purpose and effect of granting fee- setting authority to the USPTO under the AIA in the first place. Added further burdens and requests to address the alleged issues of abuse, during sequestration, will only further burden the Office and hamper the ability of the USPTO to improve its core operations of high-quality patent examination.

IX.      INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AND WORK SHARING

A.      SUBSTANTIVE PATENT LAW HARMONIZATION

      

1.    Tegernsee Group

      

Progress continues in the study of substantive patent law harmonization topics by the so-called “Tegernsee Group.”  Formed in July 2011 during a meeting held in Tegernsee, Germany, the Tegernsee Group is comprised of the Heads of the patent offices of Denmark, the European Union, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Tegernsee Group agreed to undertake a fact finding study of four topics: 1) grace period; 2) 18-month publication; 3) the prior art effect of secret prior art; and 4) prior user rights, so as to identify areas of difference and convergence between the various patent offices.  A common questionnaire was developed and distributed for public comment on these four topics to patent system users in the respective countries.  In addition to distributing this questionnaire, the patent offices also held public roundtable discussions on the four topics.  The collected questionnaire responses and comments from the roundtable discussions are currently being compiled and studied by the participating offices. 

      

2.    FIRST INVENTOR AND GRACE PERIOD DISCUSSION INTERNATIONALLY

      

With the full implementation of AIA now complete, a concentrated effort is under way to continue to engage the international patent community in discussions regarding harmonization.  This conversation was difficult in previous years due to the absence of a first inventor to file system in the United States.  The immediate task is to explain to a broad audience of patent system users, the provisions of AIA and why the new U.S. patent system is a true first to file system with a one-year inventor’s own prior art grace period rather than the pre-AIA one- year priority date grace period.  Based on meetings and teleconferences with other patent office representatives during the past year, positive momentum continues to build as we enter fall 2013 as countries around the world recognize the benefit of a uniform grace period among first to file countries and how such a grace period supports large and small patent user interests in a pro-innovation and pro-economic growth environment worldwide.

B.      TECHNICAL AND PROCEDURAL HARMONIZATION: WORK SHARING AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION PROGRAMS

      

1.    IP5 Evolution and the Global Dossier

      

Recognizing the continuing evolution and growth of initiatives, a forum of the five largest IP Patent Offices (i.e., EPO, JPO, KIPO, SIPO, USPTO (“IP5”)) agreed to a new program management model proposed by the USPTO. The model formalizes basic project management principles across the program which, until this agreement, were inconsistently applied. A key element of the model requires stakeholder benefits to be clearly defined for each of the projects and calls for periodic assessment to ensure those benefits are being achieved. The assessment will be done by the Program Managers who represent the executive leadership of the IP5. This seemingly simple change will ensure that resources dedicated to the program are commensurate with the value they deliver.

      

The plan and development of the Global Dossier initiative (“Global Dossier”) continue to advance at a rapid pace and IP5 has achieved several milestones. The Global Dossier Task Force held its first meeting in January 2013, which was hosted by the EPO in conjunction with the IP5 Working Group 2 meeting. Significant progress was made on defining and prioritizing business requirements with regard to the Global Dossier. A very basic form of one high-priority requirement, automatic cross-filing, is currently being reviewed between the USPTO and EPO.

      

After IP5 collaboration and agreement on exchange specifications and services, the IP5 Offices agreed to deploy services that enable patent information for related patent cases to be made available to examiners in the five different patent offices. Each office has its own schedule for developing the user interface and access to that information. The USPTO’s current plan is to provide examiner access in 2014. The USPTO is also investigating ways to expand the scope of the information available in the Global Dossier to patent system users and is engaged in discussions with other IP offices concerning such scope and details.

      

The USPTO continues to work very closely with the Global Dossier Task Force on outreach to further refine business requirements and structure regarding the Global Dossier and understand the priorities and needs of the broader stakeholder community.

      

2.    Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)

            

a.    Overview

            

The Patent Prosecution Highway program (PPH) continues to be a major success for the concept of a global patent work sharing regime by delivering benefits to both patent system users and IP offices. A reduction in the number of office actions, lower costs, higher issuance rates and faster examination and prosecution are several of the advantages realized by users and are the factors that drive the growth of PPH. As of September 30, 2013, the number of PPH entries approached 20,000 and the USPTO is receiving approximately 550 requests per month, a 22% increase over the previous fiscal year. Particularly, the chart below shows new PPH requests by month since January 2010, and demonstrates the program’s continuing growth and acceptance by the patent user community.

New Applications with PPH Petitions by Month (Paris-Route and PCT)
            

The USPTO currently has bilateral PPH agreements with 26 other IP offices and that number continues to grow. All participating offices work together to streamline and improve PPH. Most recently, the USPTO and 12 other offices agreed to a new PPH pilot program which would simplify the PPH for users by adhering to a common set of guidelines and a single request form for requesting entry into the PPH. This change would create a single agreement among the offices permitting an applicant to leverage the allowance from one office to all other offices, regardless of where the application was first filed. This pilot program is a major achievement for USPTO and its partners as the 13 offices account for approximately 90% of global PPH usage. Further details of the PPH pilot program are under negotiation among the offices and the pilot program will launch in January 2014.

            

As with the harmonization efforts, significant patent user outreach efforts by the USPTO continue both domestically and internationally.

            

b.    Patent Cooperation Treaty – Work Sharing (PCT-PPH)

            

Since its inception in FY 2011, PCT-PPH has become a contributing force to the increased growth of the overall PPH program. For over one year, the majority of new PPH requests at the USPTO have been filed via the PCT-PPH work sharing route. The USPTO continues on its expansion strategy and in FY 2013 formed agreements with four new offices and made the program permanent with two existing offices.

            

The USPTO has recently concluded the second phase of a Collaborative Search and Examination Pilot Program with KIPO and EPO. In this pilot program, examiners from the three Offices worked together to create a single, high quality PCT search report and written opinion. The pilot program was also used to test the feasibility of establishing such a system on a permanent basis.

            

It was the opinion of the participating USPTO examiners that the quality of the final International Search Reports and the Written Opinions of the International Searching Authority in 67% of the patent applications reviewed was greatly improved by making the final work product more complete and by providing confidence in the work product to the first examiner. Feedback directly received from these examiners in administering the pilot program supports the conclusion that collaboration across patent offices helps to increase the confidence in the final work product across offices.

      

3.    Outsourcing PCT Searches

      

Over the last several years, outsourcing of PCT searches to third party vendors has enabled the USPTO to become a world leader in overall PCT timeliness. The USPTO is attempting to maintain the progress made over the last several years, notwithstanding funding cuts dictated by the overall budget situation during FY 2013. Particularly, these budgetary cuts have resulted in an immediate impact on the USPTO’s ability to outsource its searching to these third party vendors. These cuts in outsourcing will in turn have a long-term and ongoing effect on the number of international applications waiting to be searched. As a result, the USPTO’s Chapter I timeliness for the searching of international applications filed with the USPTO will be affected until funding is restored to the USPTO.

      

4.    Patent Cooperation Treaty – Systemic Improvement

      

The USPTO, in conjunction with the United Kingdom IP Office (UKIPO), has continued to develop the “PCT 20/20” plan to improve the PCT process. After discussions at the PCT Union- - Meeting of International Authorities under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) – Twentieth Session in February 2013 in Munich, Germany, it was determined that five of the proposals contained in the “PCT 20/20” plan (i.e., Making The Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority Available to the Public After International Publication; Integration of the National/International Phases by Requiring Response to Negative Comments at the National Phase; Mandatory Recordation of Search Strategies; Mandatory Top-Up Searches In Chapter II; and Formal Integration of the Patent Prosecution Highway Into The PCT) were appropriate to be forwarded to the PCT Working Group for detailed consideration. A sixth proposal contained in the “PCT 20/20” plan (i.e., Self-Service Changes (92bis/Priority Claims)) was referred to the International Bureau for possible future incorporation in the ePCT system. The five proposals specifically discussed at the Working Group meeting received widespread support and it was agreed that changes to the PCT Regulations should be adopted to implement the proposals of “Mandatory Top-Up Searches In Chapter II” and “Making The Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority Available to the Public After International Publication.” It was also agreed that the USPTO and UKIPO would continue to develop the other proposals contained in the “PCT 20/20” plan for further consideration and future meetings of the Working Group.

      

5.    Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC)

      

The Cooperative Patent Classification system (“CPC”) is a new classification system developed jointly by the USPTO and EPO using EPO’s IPC-based European Classification System (ECLA) as a starting point. The CPC was launched in January 2013 after fourteen months of bilateral development. The CPC is based on the International Patent Classification system (IPC), which is used by the IP5. The CPC is now publicly available for use by external users and other patent offices via the link at http://www.cooperativepatentclassification.org. The USPTO and EPO also jointly developed over 625 CPC Definitions to help users understand the CPC schemes. The CPC also contains the backfile patent documents of the USPTO, EPO and EPO member states. The USPTO has begun classifying into the CPC for newly filed utility patent applications as of January 1, 2013. Eventually after a transition period, the CPC will replace the United States Patent Classification (USPC) system at the USPTO.

      

The CPC promotes international harmonization efforts. Since the CPC is an IPC-based system, harmonization efforts with other patent offices and the IPC will be improved. Recently, the KIPO and SIPO announced their intentions to classify their respective patent documents using the CPC. The CPC will ultimately contain the patent document collections from four of the five patent offices of the IP5.

      

The CPC will also promote IP5 cooperation efforts. As agreed during the IP5 meeting in June 2013 in Cupertino, California, the IP5 Global Classification Initiative Foundation Project will be aimed at harmonizing and improving the IPC using the CPC and the JPO’s File Index (FI) and F-terms classification system as its basis.

      

6.    Global Patent Search Network (GPSN)

      

As a result of cooperative effort between the USPTO and SIPO, Chinese patent documentation is now available for search and retrieval from the USPTO website via the Global Patent Search Network database (GPSN) located at http://gpsn.uspto.gov. Launched in June 2013, this searching tool enables examiners and the public to search Chinese patent documents in English or Chinese languages. The data available includes full-text native language Chinese patent documents and their corresponding English machine translations. Also available are full document images of Chinese patent documents. Users can search documents, including published applications, granted patents and utility models from 1985 to 2012 in the GPSN. There are plans to add additional international patent collections in the future.

      

7.    Overall USPTO PCT Statistics

      

Table 3 below shows the data for PCT procedures through July 2013.

      

Table 3: PCT Timeliness

 

FY 2010

FY 2011

FY 2012

FY 2013

(thru July)

RO/US
Receipt to record copy mailing

13 days

10 days

10.67 days

13.2 days

DO/EO/US
Receipt to release

251 days

159 days

95 days

88 days

ISA/US
Mailing of ISR/WO within 16 months from priority

82%

81%

55%

79%

Mailing of ISR/WO within 18 months of priority

91%

92%

88%

90%

IPEA/US
Mailing of IPER within 28 months from priority

14%

21%

29%

57%

Mailing of IPER within 30 months of priority

19.5%

27%

36%

65%

      

Note that the ISR mailing times for FY 2013 show an improvement over the previous year, despite a reduction in funding to this third party contracted work.  The USPTO anticipates the impact to timeliness will follow a pattern similar to that of the reduction in FY2011, which was comparable in scale and timing to the current case.  Based on that experience, it is anticipated that timeliness of ISR mailings will be impacted mid to late FY 2014.

C.      CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC cannot ignore the funding issues for the USPTO with respect to its ongoing international initiatives and programs. For example, the recent budget cuts have greatly limited the number of USPTO representatives who can attend important global meetings with other patent office officials. Not providing a complete delegation of USPTO representatives at these meetings only further complicates the USPTO’s efforts. Budget cuts with regard to third party contractors for international application searching will hinder the USPTO’s ability to maintain timeliness in its international application processes. Coupled with extensive budget cuts to the USPTO’s IT structure for implementing and maintaining these initiatives, programs and processes, the PPAC is concerned that such will ultimately impact the USPTO in its global leadership position.

Despite such setbacks, the PPAC applauds the USPTO for its ongoing efforts and achievements in the international arena. The PPAC notes just a few highlights for the past year -- the productive global meetings of the Tegernsee Group and IP5, the growth and continued acceptance of the PPH by the patent user community, the launch of CPC and the implementation of new online international searching tools, such as GPSN.

The PPAC supports the strides made by the USPTO in its international cooperation and work sharing initiatives among multiple patent offices and encourages the continued development and expansion of these efforts. The PPH and the Global Dossier are excellent examples of such strides and the continuing need and importance for an effective and user friendly patent application platform across multiple patent offices. The PPAC continues to recommend that the USPTO repeatedly review these efforts to ensure that the initiatives promote the overall objectives of harmonization, international work sharing, reduce duplication of efforts by offices, and promote best practices to improve timeliness and quality.

To support such initiatives, the PPAC encourages further outreach through a variety of forums to extend discussions among multiple patent offices – not just the Tengesee Group and IP5. The PPAC supports ongoing education and updates regarding the USPTO’s international initiatives and programs via roundtables, webcasts and e-mail notices to the patent user community. The PPAC also believes that continued outreach to a variety of different entities and groups from the patent user community will provide additional insight regarding international initiatives as well as increased acceptance for such initiatives in the future.

The PPAC commends the USPTO with regard to its international initiatives and programs during the past year and stands ready to offer its encouragement, support, guidance and assistance for FY 2014.

X.      USPTO OUTREACH INITIATIVES

A.      INTRODUCTION

In addition to the outreach activities conducted by the other offices of the USPTO (highlighted earlier in this report related to issues such as AIA implementation), RCEs, and substantive examination, the Office of Innovation Development (OID) oversees Patent’s efforts to support American innovation, entrepreneurship, and job creation. Often working closely with other U.S. Government officials and agencies, OID designs and implements outreach assistance programs to a wide range of stakeholders including independent inventors, women, small business concerns, university affiliates, minorities, and other underserved communities.

OID also assists the agency’s educational outreach programs that promote intellectual property protection and the valuable role it plays as a key driver of the American economy. These programs are designed to educate the public about intellectual property in general, as well as about the specifics of the patent application process, including the intricacies of patent prosecution and post grant patent issues. Post patent grant education includes the importance of patents, and other forms of IP, in starting, building, and growing a business.

In addition, OID and the office’s other outreach teams work collaboratively on the development of educational materials, activities, and programs to promote intellectual property for students, educators, and young inventors and innovators of all ages, including a particular focus on IP and STEM.

It is noteworthy that the USPTO creatively maintained a full portfolio of education and outreach throughout FY 2013 even when challenged with budget constraints. Though these constraints necessitated a nearly complete reduction in travel, OID staff maintained exemplary levels of service to stakeholders through web cast opportunities, a use of on-the-ground resources or other Federal colleagues where possible, and efforts to move distant events to the USPTO main campus where possible.

B.      INVENTORS CONFERENCES AND WOMEN’S ENTREPRENEURSHIP SYMPOSIUMS

The USPTO sponsors regional and national events to educate small business concerns and independent inventors on the patent and trademark processes and on IP business strategies, recent events listed at www.uspto.gov/inventors/events. For these events, the USPTO makes available IP expertise to the participants, including supervisory patent examiners to conduct breakout sessions and one-on-one assistance, and trademark presenters to provide education on the trademark process. Symposiums dedicated to fostering women entrepreneurs are also offered.

In FY 2013, the USPTO was able to conduct a regional independent inventors’ conference in Wichita, Kansas, at Wichita State University in April 2013. Other independent inventors’ events were planned for Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Seattle, Washington. These events and the anticipated FY 2013 Women’s Entrepreneurship Symposium, to be held in Denver, Colorado, were postponed indefinitely due to budget constraints as a result of sequestration. Historically these events are very well attended by the independent inventor community and viewed as providing significant educational benefit. The inability to hold them regionally due to the sequester makes it difficult for many independent inventors to benefit.

C.      USPTO REGIONAL OFFICE OUTREACH

Saturday Seminars, serving as a direct link for inventor’s questions, were offered quarterly at the Elijah J. McCoy Detroit Satellite Office. The final Saturday Seminar for FY 2013 was held on Saturday, September 7th, and Office staff joined by web cast, in combination with on-the-ground Detroit staff, to offer a full day of educational programming for attendees. Planning for outreach support to the Silicon Valley Regional Director Michele Lee has begun, and the Office is prepared to provide similar assistance as appropriate to both Denver and Dallas as needed and feasible.

D.      SUPPORTING INVENTOR ORGANIZATIONS

The USPTO also participates in outreach initiatives with inventor organizations throughout the United States. These are typically non-profit inventor organizations that assist inventors and innovators getting started in the patent process and who may have a desire to start a business based on their inventions.

In FY 2013, the USPTO supported inventor organizations by providing speakers and resources for organizational events as appropriate. Office staff joined the United Inventors Association (UIA) at the International Home and Housewares Show in Chicago, Illinois, to provide direct outreach and education to show attendees, particularly independent inventors located in the “Inventor’s Corner” area of the show. The show itself is attended by over 40,000 visitors and includes a student design competition. Office representatives provided direct assistance and mentoring to those students selected as top finalists in the student design competition.

E.      MINORITY/UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES

In an effort to expand its assistance to minority and underserved communities, the Office is currently working to build and strengthen partnerships with organizations, such as the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) within the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers (SHPE), the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE), national professional organizations, and national and local educational institutions. In FY 2013, Office staff participated at national and local events hosted by a majority of those organizations identified above. Participation with these organizations was often conducted in combination with the USPTO Office of Education and Outreach or the USPTO Global Intellectual Property Academy.

F.      PRO BONO PROGRAM AND BAR ASSOCIATION ENGAGEMENT

With the endorsement of Congress through the America Invents Act, the Office established the Pro Bono program, designed to assist financially under-resourced independent inventors and small businesses. In June 2011, the first pro bono pilot started in Minnesota and now serves as a model for other IP law associations across the country in the establishment of additional IP pro bono programs. The ultimate goal is to have regional pro bono programs cover the entire country and to have a single entity, The Federal Circuit Bar Association, serve as an intake and referral center for all inventors and small businesses interested in pro bono services. The Pro Bono Task Force, which includes members from the major IP law associations, the USPTO, the Minnesota pilot, and the Federal Circuit Judiciary, works to determine the best way to coordinate the growth of future programs.

The pro bono program is operational in Minnesota, Colorado, California, and the Washington, DC metropolitan regions. These programs currently cover 16 states. With the addition of Texas, Boston and PA/DE that coverage will include parts or all of 27 states. By early 2014, it is estimated that an additional 10 states will have all or part coverage by a regional program.

On October 25, 2013, the AIA pro bono Task Force will no longer exist. In its place will be a chartered AIA pro bono Advisory Council. The Charter is scheduled to be signed by more than 50 individuals from major law associations, regional programs and Government officials from all three branches of the Federal Government. The Advisory Council will be charged with the continued growth/expansion of pro bono programs as well as making sure programs are operated in a relatively consistent manner from region to region.

There was increased participation with bar associations, particularly through the establishment of pro bono programs described above.  The USPTO has also increased collaboration with the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), primarily with the AIPLA Public Education Committee as well as increasing presentations and interactions with Bar Associations by Office personnel including PTAB, legislative affairs representatives, and the AIA implementation team. The greater interaction with the user community has been very well received and the PPAC applauds the Office’s efforts.

G.      TRAINING MATERIALS AND WEB-BASED SUPPORT

The USPTO has several Websites available to assist independent inventors and pro se applicants such as: (www.uspto.gov/inventors/proseprobono) for those inventors that are either filing on their own behalf (pro se) or are seeking free or greatly reduced services from patent professionals, (www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/iip) which provides “plain language” information about the patent and trademark processes and resources available through the USPTO, and (www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/informational_videos.jsp which provides a series of videos located on the USPTO’s AIA micro-site to provide straightforward education to independent inventors and entrepreneurs explaining important changes resulting from the recently enacted America Invents Act. The Office is continuing to develop these pages to make them actively dynamic as rules change and to develop additional training material content. The Office also provides a dedicated email address for inventors and small businesses to submit questions IndependentInventor@USPTO.GOV and distributes an email monthly newsletter - The Inventors Eye (www.uspto.gov/inventors/independent).

H.      IP ASSESSMENT TOOL/SMALL BUSINESS EDUCATION

In collaboration with the National Institute of Standards and Technology – Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST/MEP), the Office has created a tool for use by small businesses that will allow them to self-assess their intellectual property (IP) assets. The tool is a web-based questionnaire that asks small business pertinent questions about products and/or services offered, created or sold by their business providing a semi-custom report according to the specific responses to the questions answered. In FY 2013, OID continued to refine the IP Assessment Tool and develop background materials for use in combination with the tool. Additionally, Office staff continues to strengthen ties with the Small Business Administration (SBA). One example is participation of the OID staff in local activities and events providing education to entrepreneurs as a part of “National Small Business Week”.

I.      UNIVERSITY OUTREACH/TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

The Office has long played a role in IP educational outreach to universities; initial efforts were directed where the USPTO had a well-established recruiting effort with nearby universities. In conducting university outreach, lectures target engineering students, business and entrepreneurship students, student organizations, and the university’s technology transfer office. At many universities, the USPTO also provides lectures to faculty and staff about the state of IP protection in the current environment. In addition, during FY 2013 the Office frequently collaborated with the National Academy of Inventors and InventNow in reaching out to university patent holders and collegiate inventors.

J.      MUSEUM OUTREACH

The Office frequently works with museums seeking information, assistance, education, and exhibits. Over 40 applicants drawn from major corporations, universities, Federal agencies and the independent inventor community were selected to present at the 2013 Innovation Expo; however, the event was cancelled for budgetary reasons. The USPTO has a long-term collaboration with the Smithsonian Institution and going forward in FY 2014 the Office will assist the Smithsonian in developing programs and exhibits for the Innovation Pavilion of the Arts and Industries Building, scheduled to reopen in 2014.

The USPTO continues its efforts to further expand outreach and assistance seeking opportunities to collaborate with like-minded organizations and events to share IP education and information in its efforts to support American innovation, entrepreneurship, and job creation. In FY 2013, the Office participated in the 2013 World IP Day Celebrations hosted by the American Intellectual Property Law Association and the August 2013 cross-country trip by the Millennial Trains Project.

K.      RECOMMENDATIONS

The PPAC commends the Office on the significant outreach efforts to the entire user community from women entrepreneurs and independent inventors to bar associations and national organizations. Nonetheless, sequestration has negatively impacted the amount and form of outreach that was possible. The USPTO’s outreach efforts directly support innovators who start businesses and create jobs. The PPAC recommends that the Office continue to make itself available to all aspects of user community and continue to be creative in finding ways to provide outreach opportunities at all levels, even under sequester.

Appendix

LOUIS J. FOREMAN, CHAIRMAN

LOUIS J. FOREMAN, CHAIRMANLouis Foreman is founder and Chief Executive of Enventys, an integrated product design and engineering firm. He is also CEO of Edison Nation. Louis graduated from The University of Illinois with a Bachelors of Science degree in Economics. His interest in starting businesses and developing innovative products began while a sophomore with his first company founded in his fraternity room. Over the past 20 years Louis has created 9 successful start-ups and has been directly responsible for the creation of over 20 others. A prolific inventor, he is the inventor of 10 registered US Patents, and his firm is responsible for the development of well over 500 more.

The recipient of numerous awards for entrepreneurial achievement, his passion for small business extends beyond his own companies. Louis is an adjunct professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, teaching at Queens University, Johnson & Wales University and The McColl School of Business.

Louis is a frequent lecturer and radio / TV guest on the topics of innovation, intellectual property and small business creation, and is frequently invited by national trade associations to be a featured speaker on the topic of innovation.

In addition to being an inventor, Louis is also committed to inspiring others to be innovative. Louis is the creator of the Emmy® Award winning PBS TV show, Everyday Edisons, and serves as the Executive Producer and lead judge. The show is filming its fifth season and appears nationally on PBS. In 2007, Louis became the publisher of Inventors Digest, a 28 year old publication devoted to the topic of American Innovation. In 2009, his first book, The Independent Inventor’s Handbook, was published by Workman Publishing.

Louis serves on the Board of Directors of the James Dyson Foundation, the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO), Ventureprise, New Dominion Bank, and the Intellectual Property Owners Educational Foundation (IPOEF). Most recently, Louis was appointed by SBA Administrator, Karen Mills, to serve a three year term on the National SBDC Advisory Board.

ESTHER M. KEPPLINGER, VICE CHAIR

ESTHER M. KEPPLINGER, VICE CHAIREsther Kepplinger is Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati's Chief Patent Counselor. Her responsibilities include serving as the firm's liaison to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), ensuring that all of its patent filings are conducted in the most efficient and defensible manner, and enhancing the firm's inter partes PTO practice. She also serves as an expert witness on USPTO practices and procedures. Prior to joining the firm in 2005, Esther served as deputy commissioner for patent operations in the USPTO in Alexandria, Virginia, for five years. As deputy commissioner, she oversaw the nation's patent-examination process, with all the patent examiners in the United States reporting to her. Esther managed a budget of $700 million and was responsible for the day-to-day operations of the country's seven patent technology centers, including about 4,500 people.

Esther also played a pivotal role in establishing the policies and strategic direction of the patent examining corps, helping to implement the USPTO's goals for improving quality and efficiency of service. With the USPTO since 1973, Esther has held a variety of other positions, including patent examiner and supervisor for a biotechnology art unit and group director for the chemical and materials engineering group. While at the USPTO, Esther received a number of awards, including the Presidential Rank Award in 2002 and the Department of Commerce Gold Medal in 1998 and 2004.various positions, including examiner.

WAYNE P. SOBON

WAYNE P. SOBONWayne P. Sobon, Vice President and General Counsel of Inventergy, Inc. is responsible for Inventergy’s overall legal operations. Wayne was most recently Vice President and Chief IP Counsel for Rambus Inc., responsible for Rambus’ global intellectual property development program. Originally from Phoenix, Arizona, Wayne received his B.S. degree in physics and B.A. degree in German Studies from Stanford University in 1984 and his J.D. and M.B.A. from the University of California, Berkeley in 1992. Since receiving his law and business degrees, Wayne worked at several Silicon Valley law firms, most recently Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich LLP (now DLA Piper), where he was a partner specializing in patent prosecution, litigation and general intellectual property counseling. Wayne served as Associate General Counsel, and Director of Intellectual Property for Accenture from 2000 to 2011.

Wayne is a frequent speaker and lecturer on intellectual property issues, is President Elect of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), a member of the USPTO’s Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC), a member of the board of Invent Now.org of the National Inventor Hall of Fame, and a prior member of the board of the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO).

VALERIE LANDRIO MCDEVITT, J. D., MST

VALERIE LANDRIO MCDEVITT, J. D., MSTValerie Landrio McDevitt is the Assistant Vice President at the University of South Florida, Office of Technology Transfer, the Division of Patents and Licensing. In 2010, USF was ranked 20th among technology transfer offices in licensing revenue and 9th among universities for US patents issued.

Prior to joining USF, Valerie served as assistant patent counsel and a research chemist for Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals. She also participated in the American Association for the Advancement of Science Fellowship program and worked as a science advisor with a House subcommittee in Washington, D.C.

Valerie received her BS in Chemistry from Siena College in Loudonville, New York, MST in Chemistry at the University of Florida, and a JD at Emory University School of Law. She is a certified licensing professional through LES, a registered technology transfer professional through ATTP, a member of the Georgia and Florida bars, and is admitted to practice before the Federal Patent and Trademark Office.

CLINTON H. HALLMAN, JR.

CLINTON H. HALLMAN, JR.Clinton Hallman is the Chief Patent Counsel for Kraft Foods Group, Inc. He has responsibility for patent matters at Kraft and manages a staff with counsel in the Chicago area. His time at Kraft has involved a variety of experiences including major litigation matters, business divestures, and IP strategy development. Prior to working at Kraft he was a patent counsel at the Altria Group for several years where he was responsible for patent prosecution, opinion work and significant client counseling. His responsibilities there included a stint at an Altria subsidiary that was created to market technology developed for the tobacco industry in other areas such as medical devices, fuel injector technology and alloys. Clinton has had a stint in private practice at a small IP boutique where he handled patent, trademark and copyright matters working with companies in the textiles and furniture industries.

Clinton got his start in IP at Mobil Oil Corporation where he worked as a project engineer and construction manager for several years before joining the office of patent counsel. His patent work at Mobil included support of the plastics division of Mobil Chemical.

Clinton served as an officer in the US navy having been commissioned in 1977. His service was all sea duty with most of that time assigned to the engineering departments of the ships on which he served.

Clinton is a 1977 graduate of the US Naval Academy with a degree in Mechanical Engineering. He is a 1994 graduate of the George Mason University School of Law in the Patent Track. He is admitted to practice in Illinois (Corporate), North Carolina and Virginia. He is a member of the Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago, the American Intellectual Property Law Association, and the American Bar Association. He sits on the board of directors of the Greater Chicago Food Depository the Intellectual Property Association of Chicago and the Loyola Academy Sailing Club.

Clinton is married and has two sons, ages 27 and 21. He lives and works in the suburbs north of Chicago, Il.

MARYLEE JENKINS

MARYLEE JENKINSMarylee Jenkins is a partner at Arent Fox LLP and head of the New York Office’s Intellectual Property Group. She has extensive experience in all aspects of intellectual property matters and counsels a diverse international client base that includes Fortune 500 companies, not-for profit organizations, and small businesses. She counsels clients on disputes and strategies, portfolio enforcement and management, e-commerce, and software development and protection on issues involving computers and the Internet. Throughout her career, Marylee has devised unique and innovative solutions to complex intellectual property matters for clients across the globe.

On protection and enforcement matters, Marylee has routinely prosecuted domestic and foreign patent applications in the electrical, electromechanical and computer industries, including computer hardware and software, Internet and computer-related technologies, telecommunication, and information and financial systems. In addition, she provides counseling and opinion work on trademark selection, clearance, prosecution, registration, brand management and enforcement and represents clients in intellectual property and bankruptcy litigations and in patent appeals, reexaminations and reissues and trademark oppositions and cancellations before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Marylee has been a member of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) since February 2013. She is a past Chairperson of the American Bar Association’s Section of Intellectual Property Law and is a past President of the New York Intellectual Property Law Association. She is currently serving again as a member of the ABA Standing Committee on Technology and Information Systems and is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation. Marylee is a member of John Marshall Law School’s Intellectual Property Law Advisory Board and was a member of Columbia Engineering School’s Engineering Council for several years. 

Marylee holds a B.S. in mechanical engineering from Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science, a B.S. in physics from Centre College of Kentucky and a J.D. from New York Law School. Marylee is admitted to the bars of New York, Connecticut, the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the U.S. Supreme Court and is registered to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

A. CHRISTAL SHEPPARD, Ph.D., J.D.

A. CHRISTAL SHEPPARD, Ph.D., J.D.Assistant Professor Sheppard joined the University of Nebraska faculty in 2011, after over two decades of Science and Intellectual Property Law and Policy experience. She is an Assistant Professor and co-founded a program of Concentrated Study in Intellectual Property law at the Law College.

Dr. Sheppard began her career as a scientist earning a M.S. and Ph.D. in Cellular and Molecular Biology from the University of Michigan.  After receiving a J.D. from Cornell University Law School and interning with Judge Radar at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Executive Office of the President's Office of Science and Technology Policy, she was a practicing attorney at the law firm of Foley & Lardner earning extensive experience in patent prosecution, client patent counseling and ligation. She then served in the Office of the General Counsel of the United States International Trade Commission working on Section 337 matters, arguing before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  In 2005, Dr. Sheppard also completed Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government’s Executive Education for Senior Managers in Government program.

Her successful career in intellectual property law and policy included her tenure as Chief Counsel on Patents and Trademarks for the United States House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary where she was integral in many endeavors including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, the most comprehensive change to this nation's intellectual property laws in over 60 years. 

In April of 2012, Dr. Sheppard testified before the United States Congress House Committee on the Judiciary at the hearing “International Patent Issues: Promoting a Level Playing Field for American Industry Abroad.” She has been quoted by the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones News Wire, Fox Business, the Chicago Sun Times and Politico.  

PETER THURLOW

PETER THURLOWPeter Thurlow is a patent attorney and partner at Jones Day law firm in New York. He has significant experience in all aspects of domestic and international patent prosecution, including post-grant reissue, ex parte, and inter partes reexamination proceedings. As a patent prosecution attorney, his experience includes drafting, filing, and prosecuting United States patent cooperation treaties and international patent applications. Mr. Thurlow provides litigation support for patent litigation in the District Courts, the International Trade Commission, and before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Mr. Thurlow is the current chairperson of the Patent Law Committee for the New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA). Mr. Thurlow has been active in the implementation of the America Invents Act (AIA), representing the NYIPLA’s views before the USPTO. Mr. Thurlow received his bachelor's degree in marine engineering from the United States Merchant Marine Academy; his master's in business administration from Pace University in New York; and his law degree from Brooklyn Law School. Mr. Thurlow is serving his first term as a PPAC member.

PAUL JACOBS

PAUL JACOBSDr. Jacobs is the founder and president of Jake Technologies, Inc., a technology service company focused on strategic technology development, product evaluation, and advising corporate counsel and law firms on issues related to intellectual property. Prior to founding Jake Technologies, Inc., Dr. Jacobs held leadership positions as chief technology officer, Primus Technology Solutions; president and chief operating officer, and chief technology officer, AnswerLogic, Inc.; managing vice president, electronic commerce, director of product marketing, and director of media information technologies, SRA International, Inc.; president and chief executive officer, IsoQuest, Inc.; and as a computer scientist at General Electric. Dr. Jacobs received his bachelor's and master's degrees in applied mathematics at Harvard University; and his doctorate from the University of California, Berkeley. He currently teaches Information Architecture at the University of Maryland in College Park. Dr. Jacobs is serving his first term as a member of the PPAC.

Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 198 

Trademark Public Advisory Committee Annual Report 2013

TRADEMARK PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 2013

United States Patent and Trademark Office

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

    Table of Contents
I.   Introduction
II.   Discussion of Specific Issues
  A.     Trademark Operations Performance
    1.    Performance Statistics
    2.    Quality and Training
    3.    Initiatives Completed in FY 2013
    4.    Ongoing Initiatives
    5.    Outreach Initiatives
    6.    International Matters
  B.     IT and E-Government Issues
    1.    Trademarks Next Generation (“TMNG”)
  C.     Budget and Funding Issues
    1.    Access to Funds - Treatment of User Fees under Sequester
    2.    USPTO use of Activity - Based Cost accounting and expansion to TTAB
    3.    Maintenance of both Trademark AND Patent Fence
  D.     Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
    1.    Precedential Decisions
    2.    Performance Statistics
    3.    TTAB Manual of Procedure (TBMP)
    4.    Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR)
    5.    TTAB Roundtable on ACR
    6.    Creation of TTAB Dashboard

Trademark Public Advisory Committee

Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Report


I.    Introduction

This is the fourteenth annual report of the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (“TPAC”). This report reviews the Trademark organization and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for the fiscal year (“FY”) ending September 30, 2013. TPAC’s mission, which is specified in enabling legislation, 35 U.S.C. § 5(b)(1) and (d)(1), is “to represent the interests of diverse users” of the USPTO and to “review the policies, goals, performance, budget, and user fees” of the USPTO with respect to trademarks.

Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 5(d)(2), this report is submitted within 60 days following the end of the Federal fiscal year (FY) and is transmitted to the President, the Secretary of Commerce and the Committees on the Judiciary of the Senate and the House of Representatives. This report is submitted for publication in the Official Gazette of the USPTO. The report will be available to the public on the USPTO Web site, www.uspto.gov.

Members of TPAC As of the end of FY 2013, the following individuals were members of TPAC:

Anne H. Chasser, Strategic Advisor, Wolfe, Sadler, Breen, Morasch & Colby, LLC, Cincinnati, Ohio (term ends December 6, 2013)
Deborah Hampton, Senior Intellectual Property Specialist, Katten Muchin Rosenmann LLP, New York, New York (term ends December 6, 2013)
Cheryl Black, Partner, Goodman Allen & Filetti, PLLC, Richmond, Virginia (term ends December 6, 2013)
Jody Haller Drake, Partner, Sughrue Mion, LLC, Washington, D.C. (term ends December 1, 2014)
Ray Thomas, Jr., Owner, Law Office of Ray Thomas, Jr. PLLC, Washington, D.C. (term ends December 1, 2014)
Linda McLeod, Partner, Kelly IP, New York, New York (term ends December 1, 2014)
Kathryn Barrett Park (Vice Chair), Senior Counsel, General Electric Corporation, Fairfield, Connecticut (term ends December 1, 2015)
Dee Ann Weldon-Wilson, Trademark Counsel, Exxon Mobil Corporation, Irving, Texas (term ends December 1, 2015)
Maury M. Tepper, III (Chair), Member, Tepper & Eyster, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina (term ends December 1, 2015)

In addition to the above voting Members, the following people are non-voting TPAC members representing the membership of USPTO unions:

Harold Ross of the National Treasury Employees Union (“NTEU”) Chapter 243.
Howard Friedman of NTEU Chapter 245.
Randall P. Myers of the Patent Office Professional Association.

Report Highlights

During a year of significant external challenges and uncertainty, TPAC is pleased to report that Trademarks continued to achieve exceptional performance. Thanks to talented and dedicated leadership and to an environment of commitment and teamwork, Trademarks was able to adapt to an uncertain economic climate and to unfortunate reductions in its access to fees paid into the Office by users. Although a number of adjustments were required, Trademarks continued to deliver on its core mission of maintaining an accurate, reliable use-based register of trademark rights. Trademarks also managed to continue the development of its new IT systems which represent a significant investment of both time and resource by the trademark community, and which is beginning to deliver valuable enhancements that should pay dividends to the trademark community as this initiative moves on to completion.

TPAC wishes to commend Commissioner for Trademarks, Deborah Cohn, for her vision and leadership during a challenging year. To the external trademark community, the Trademarks organization continued to deliver a high level of service, to actively seek feedback from its customers on enhancements to its practices, to continue raising the bar on its own quality measures and to provide outreach to the business community about the value of trademarks.

The Trademarks organization enjoys a very talented group of leaders, and their experience and involvement continue to provide stability and efficiency that is unfortunately too rare in government. TPAC views the ability of Trademarks to attract, promote and retain such a talented group of leaders as one of the keys to its long-term success. TPAC is also very aware that the high level of service provided by Trademarks is the result of the combined efforts of Trademark Examining Attorneys, Trademark Specialists, technical and legal support and the entire staff, and we wish to thank all for their service.

FY 2013 marked a year of dramatic improvement at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”), and TPAC commends Commissioner Cohn and Chief Judge Rogers for their cooperation in finding ways to assign the right people to the challenging job of bringing about change and improvements to a system that faced a significant backlog of cases. In particular, Group Director Meryl Hershkowitz accepted an assignment to the TTAB and worked closely with Chief Judge Rogers to achieve results in FY 2013 that mark a turnaround in trends observed over the last several years. We also want to commend the TTAB Interlocutory Attorneys and Trademark Administrative Judges for their significant contribution to these results.

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) continues to make progress on the significant task of creating a new, unified architecture that will replace the existing patchwork of legacy systems and programs within Trademarks. OCIO and Trademarks are working closely and in a cooperative manner to ensure that trademark filers will receive the benefits of the significant investment made over the last several years in this project.

The Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) continues to work to maintain as much stability and predictability as is possible in a challenging economic landscape, made even more so by externalities presented by government budgeting and funding procedures and by sequestration (discussed more fully below). Further, OCFO is deploying improved models – Activity Based Information (“ABI”) – to more accurately allocate the use and spending of user fees from trademark customers.

As a whole, TPAC commends these groups for their dedicated service and performance.

II.    Discussion of Specific Issues

A.      Trademark Operations Performance.

    1. Performance Statistics.
             a.    

Increase in Applications.  In FY 2013, trademark application filings increased from FY 2012 levels, to a total of 433,654 classes.  This represents an increase of 4.5% from FY 2012.

                 

Balanced Disposals Met Projections.  Continuing the trend shown in FY 2011 and FY 2012, Trademark Operations maintained high productivity in FY 2013.  Total Examining Attorney production was 875,274 Balanced Disposals.  A “Balanced Disposal” represents one of three potential actions regarding an application:  a first Office Action issued, approval of an application for publication (examination is complete), or abandonment of the application.  The FY 2013 total of Balanced Disposals exceeded the Trademark Operations target of 869,600 Balanced Disposals by 1.6%.

             b.    

Total Office Disposals.  “Total Office Disposals” are made up of the number of applications that either result in issued registrations or are abandoned. Total Office Disposals for FY 2013 were 405,412.

             c.    

Average First-Action Pendency in Target Range.  “Average First-Action Pendency” was 3.1 months for FY 2013, falling within the USPTO’s target range of 2.5 to 3.5 months.  First-Action Pendency is the time between the filing of a trademark application and the substantive review of that application by the USPTO (which usually results in either an Office Action or a Notice of Publication).  TPAC continues to wholeheartedly support and endorse the First-Action Pendency target range set by Trademarks, as we believe that this range represents an appropriate balance between providing a fast response to trademark applicants and maintaining a stable and sufficient inventory of work for the Examining Attorneys.

             d.    

Average Total Pendency.  “Average Total Pendency” is the average time between the filing of a trademark application and final disposition of that application, whether by registration, abandonment, or issuance of a Notice of Allowance. 

                 

Average Total Pendency for FY 2013 was 11.7 months when suspended and interpartes cases are included, and 10 months when those cases are excluded. An application is suspended if the outcome of another matter must be known before further action on the application can be taken, such as when there is a previously filed application for a confusingly similar trademark that has not yet either registered or been abandoned.  An interpartes case is an action before the TTAB, such as an opposition to registration.

             e.    

Overall.  Continuing a trend stretching back more than six years, Trademark Operations substantially met or exceeded ALL of its quantitative performance goals for FY 2013. TPAC commends Commissioner Deborah Cohn, her senior staff and all of the dedicated Examining Attorneys, paralegals, document supervisors and others in Trademarks for this outstanding performance. The continued efficiency, reliability and success of Trademarks is particularly remarkable in view of the fluctuations and challenges in the market during the recent past.

    2. Quality and Training. TPAC is pleased to note that Trademarks continues to place an emphasis not only on meeting quantitative performance measures, but also on the quality of examination, thereby ensuring that the Trademark Register remains a useful and reliable reflection of the substantive rights of trademark owners.
             a.    

Compliance Rate.  Currently, examination quality is measured by evaluating applications at two different points during the examining process.  The review of random samples of applications in various stages of examination results in a measurement referred to as the “compliance rate” (i.e., the percentage of actions or decisions that have been determined to have no deficiencies or errors). The first point of review and evaluation looks at initial Office Actions that reject applications for registration or that raise other issues regarding formalities that require rectification in the application.  The second review occurs at the “final disposition” of applications, either by a final refusal to register or a decision to approve an application for publication.  The goal in both instances is to ascertain whether the Examining Attorney’s decisions and written Office Actions comport with bases of refusal set forth in the Trademark Act of 1946.

                 

The goal for FY 2013 was 95.5 percent compliance for first Office Actions and 97 percent for final disposition.  For FY 2013, Trademarks achieved 96.3 percent for first Office Action compliance, which exceeded the goal. Also for FY 2013, the Trademark Operation achieved 97.1 percent final disposition compliance.

             b.    

Exceptional Office Action. In FY 2013, Trademarks continued the standard of comprehensive quality that it instituted in 2011. Instead of simply reviewing legal decision-making and completeness of an Office Action, Trademarks also measures the percentage of first Office Actions that are excellent in all respects. 

             c.    

The “Exceptional Office Action” standard includes four criteria:  (i) the appropriateness of the likelihood of confusion search, (ii) the quality of the evidence provided, (iii) the clarity of the writing (i.e., clear, succinct and concise), and (iv) the quality of decision-making. The Exceptional Office Action metrics show that the Office has exceeded its goal, as 35.1 percent of all first Office Actions met the criteria for the Exceptional Office Action at the close of FY 2013.

             d.    

In FY 2013 Trademarks held advanced training on these issues for all Managing Attorneys and Examining Attorneys. TPAC applauds Trademarks for continuing to “raise the bar” on it performance measures and for focusing Examining Attorneys on appropriate metrics for communication, thoroughness and timeliness in a manner that will benefit trademark applicants.

             e.    

Training. Continuing with the collaboration with User Groups concerning Examining Attorney training, two educational programs were presented in connection with the entertainment industry and trademark matters associated with that industry, and a program was presented on the new gTLDs landscape relating to the expanding domain name registry.

             f.    

The Office provided advanced Section 2(d) training for Examining Attorneys on issues surrounding determinations of likelihood of confusion. In addition, Trademarks completed an analysis of best practices in examination and plans to publish a Best Practices document for Examining Attorneys in the beginning of FY2014.

             g.    

Looking ahead, the Office is currently working with user groups on two quality-related projects. First, Trademarks is seeking input from industry experts to update terminology in the Manual of Acceptable Goods and Services. Second, Trademarks has requested external review of a set of approximately 200 issued Office Actions to validate the USPTO’s own quality metrics and to seek information on any areas where the Office may need to focus on additional training. Trademarks expects to complete both of these projects during FY 2014.

    3. Initiatives Completed in FY 2013
             a.    

End of Paper Official Gazette, and release of E-OG

                 

At the beginning of the fiscal year, Trademarks announced that the Government Printing Office (GPO) would discontinue publishing the Trademark Official Gazette (TMOG). On December 25, 2012, GPO published the last print edition of the TMOG.

                 

Subscriptions to the paper edition of the TMOG had dwindled in recent years, and at the conclusion of paper circulation on December 24, 2012, there were fewer than 150 paper subscriptions remaining. The elimination of the need to format OG information for paper publication has allowed the USPTO to enhance the format and features of electronic TMOG (e-TMOG) to improve user experiences.

                 

The USPTO solicited stakeholder input on e-TMOG enhancements at two focus group meetings in early October.

                 

Feedback collected from external users and from bulk users was shared with the team of Trademarks and Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) staff responsible for developing the new web-based version of the e-TMOG. In June of 2013, the USPTO released a beta version of the new enhanced e-TMOG and invited user input. The USPTO presented a live demonstration of the beta version at the TPAC Public Meeting held on July 9, 2013. A final version of the new e-TMOG was released at the end of FY 2013.

                 

TPAC applauds Trademarks and OCIO for their collaboration in the architectural engineering of the new e-TMOG and for the expediency and efficiency with which this project was handled. Based on our review of the e-TMOG, TPAC believes that this release will provide significant benefits to the trademark community.

             b.    

TMEP Updates

                 

In October 2012, the USPTO issued the 8th edition of the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) in a new electronic format. The new TMEP is formatted in Reference Document Management Services (RDMS) system. The new TMEP was re-formatted with enhanced search features to make it more user-friendly.

                 

With the use of RDMS, the Office has more flexibility and control over content of the TMEP, and future revisions and incorporation of user comments can be more readily incorporated. The increased control allows the USPTO to provide more frequent updates to the TMEP. The semi-annual editions will incorporate precedential decisions and previously issued examination guides, as well as user-generated feedback collected from IdeaScale. The Office published its first semi-annual edition in April 2013.

             c.    

Examination Guides

                 

In furtherance of its efforts to address training of Examining Attorneys, and in response to stakeholder questions and concerns, the Office issued a detailed Examination Guide on webpage specimens as displays associated with goods. Prior to issuing the Exam Guide, the Office released a draft version for comment by Examining Attorneys and stakeholders. Continuing initiatives in response to feedback from practitioners and other stakeholders expressing a desire to provide constructive input on examination guides, draft versions of two additional examination guides were released in FY 2013. “Geographic Certification Marks was released June 26, 2013, and open for comment to August 15, 2013. "Applications for Marks Comprised of gTLDs for Domain Name Registration or Registry Services" was released August 9, 2013, and open for comment to October 23, 2013.

             d.    

New Suspension Practice

                 

In response to feedback from practitioners, the Office developed a new suspension practice to address the issue of cited registered marks that may expire or cancel during the examination process. This was an important and welcome change to previous practice.

    4. Ongoing Initiatives
             a.    

Pilot Program to Review Post-Registration Specimens

                 

In FY 2012, Trademarks announced a pilot program, to review the extent to which identifications of goods and descriptions of services in post-registration filings are accurate. Under this program, Trademarks has selected 500 filings for review, and has, where appropriate, asked registrants to submit additional specimens where there are multiple goods or services listed in a Class.

                 

This pilot is ongoing, but Trademarks expects to gain valuable data to help better assess the degree to which the Register accurately reflects those goods and services on which a mark is actually in use. TPAC applauds this initiative and the degree to which Trademarks seeks to ensure an accurate Register that can be relied upon by the public.

             b.    

Request for Comments on Trademark Registration Renewals and Technology Changes

                 

Trademarks issued a Request for Comments regarding how best to address the maintenance of trademark registrations that include goods and services that have been impacted by changes in technology. Comments are open until December 1, 2013. TPAC applauds the effort by Trademarks to continue to seek public input and guidance when addressing potential changes to its practices.

    5. Outreach Initiatives
             a.    

Law School Clinic Certification Pilot Program

                 

In 2008, the USPTO launched the Law School Clinic Certification Pilot Program. The program expanded in 2010 and further expanded in 2012. Currently, 28 law schools participate in the program, which is administered by the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) in collaboration with other departments. Under this program, law students are permitted, under the supervision of a duly certified Faculty Supervisor, to assist clients on a pro bono basis, with trademark matters before the USPTO.

                 

On March 12, 2013, OED arranged for Faculty Supervisors and their Student Attorneys to visit the USPTO, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Capitol. In June 2013 and July 2013, the OED conducted 15-minute telephone conferences with each Faculty Supervisor. These calls allowed OED to answer questions, address issues or concerns and get feedback or suggestions on ways to improve the program.

                 

On July 30, 2013, the OED conducted a mandatory webinar/telephone conference. The objective of this annual training session is to educate and update Faculty Supervisors. Each year, OED also sends representatives to visit each participating law school.

                 

Since inception, approximately 1,000 Student-Attorneys have participated in the program. To date, 158 trademark applications were reportedly filed through the program.

                 

TPAC is pleased with this well-organized program for two main reasons. First, it provides the extraordinary opportunity for Student-Attorneys to gain invaluable real-world experience in intellectual property during law school. Second, the program makes quality legal representation affordable for individual entrepreneurs and small business owners desiring to protect their intellectual property rights.

    6. International Matters
             a.    

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Attaché Program

                 

TPAC’s review of the USPTO budget over the past few years raised the issue of Trademarks’ investment in the program. In order to learn more about this fairly new program, representatives of the Office of Policy and External Affairs were invited to give a presentation. During TPAC’s Public Meeting on October 12, 2012, Shira Perlmutter (Chief Policy Officer, Office of Policy and External Affairs) and Dom Keating (Director, IPR Attaché Program) gave a presentation.

                 

Generally, IPR Attachés are subject matter experts serving as diplomats in foreign countries/regions. In 1992, Japan assigned an IPR Attaché to Switzerland in order to achieve an advantage for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement negotiations. Realizing the benefits of that strategy, in 1993 the U.S. assigned to Switzerland its first IPR Attaché. Approximately a decade later, the second IPR Attaché was assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Beijing in response to the increasing significance of IPR issues in China. The program was formally instituted in 2006 as a result of the successes of the first two IPR Attachés and the 2005 funding that Congress allocated to international outreach efforts.

                 

To date, IPR Attachés have been assigned to the following countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, India, Mexico, Russia, Switzerland and Thailand. The general objective of the program is to promote U.S. IP policies, which include taking the actions necessary to strengthen the protection and enforcement of IPR of U.S. businesses abroad. The IPR Attachés are supported in their efforts by country/region specific teams in the USPTO’s Office of Policy and External Affairs.

                 

In 2010, former Director David Kappos established a task force to evaluate the program and make recommendations regarding its future. The project resulted in 18 proposals, all of which were approved, including expanding the program resulting in an attaché for South Africa and developing better training (addressed within the Office of Policy and External Affairs and work-details in the Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator).

                 

TPAC will continue to monitor the program to ensure that Trademark’s investment is proportionate to the percentage of time the IPR Attachés and their support are dedicating to trademark-related matters.

             b.    

Madrid Protocol Updates

                 

As of the dates listed, the following countries acceded to the Madrid Protocol: Philippines (July 25, 2012), Columbia (August 29, 2012), New Zealand (December 10, 2012), Mexico (February 19, 2013), India (July 8, 2013), and Rwanda (August 17, 2013). The USPTO has provided (or will provide) technical assistance to some of the new members, including Mexico and India.

                 

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is creating a multi-language database of identifications/recitations of goods/services. WIPO plans for each country to review the contents of the database and indicate which items are acceptable (language, specificity, etc.) to their national Trademark office. The USPTO is participating in the project.

                 

The USPTO is collaborating with WIPO to plan a seminar on advanced Madrid Protocol practice. The seminar would be offered through the USPTO’s Global Intellectual Property Academy.

             c.    

TM5 Annual Meetings

                 

By way of background, “Trilateral” references the governmental cooperation established over a decade ago by the USPTO, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) and the Office of Harmonization for the Internal Markets (OHIM) to promote harmonization of trademarks among the members’ offices. The name has been changed to “TM5”, to reflect the recent addition of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) and the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) of the People’s Republic of China to the group.

                 

The last Annual Meeting was held October 30 - 31, 2012 in Barcelona, Spain. At that time, the Partners discussed various projects including: i) developing a list of identification/recitation of goods/services that will be accepted in all five countries (ID Project); and ii) holding a bad faith filings-seminar being coordinated by the JPO and tentatively planned for late 2013 in Tokyo (Bad Faith Project).

                 

The Partners have designated the KIPO to act as the secretariat for the next Annual Meeting. The event is scheduled for December 5- 6 2013, in Seoul, Korea.

B.      IT and E-Government Issues

    1. Trademarks Next Generation (“TMNG”)
            

In 2009, the Director of the USPTO instructed the Office of the Chief Information Officer (“OCIO”) to separate the trademark information-technology infrastructure from the rest of the USPTO IT infrastructure and implement an integrated IT system for end-to-end electronic processing of trademark applications and trademark registration maintenance. Trademarks Next Generation (“TMNG”) is intended to replace the patchwork of legacy applications and databases that operate on relatively old software.

            

Moreover, TMNG is intended to give trademark owners and practitioners, as well as Examining Attorneys, all of the tools needed for end-to-end electronic trademark processing and to accommodate the dynamic information needs of trademark owners.

            

Although the scope of TMNG has broadened significantly since its inception, and the transition from existing legacy systems to a new, integrated system will take years, OCIO continues to manage the TMNG project well. In particular, OCIO has improved its communication and cooperation with Trademark Operations, and this has enabled OCIO to identify a number of business priorities for Trademarks and to develop an action item list, grouped by tiers of relative importance.

            

The priority items have been segregated by fiscal year and, as is typical with any project of this magnitude, priorities have at times shifted within the tier structure according to current need, budget and other factors at the USPTO.

            

During FY 2013, OCIO made significant progress on several key projects.

             Universal Laptop Deployment
             Separation and virtualization
             Trademark Content Management System
             Madrid Stabilization
             Business priorities and wish list
             a.    

Universal Laptop Deployment (“ULP”)

                 

TPAC congratulates OCIO on the successful rollout of its deployment to Trademark employees of the new universal laptop computers to replace the personal computers and laptops previously used. The new laptops feature both standard software needed by all USPTO employees and, within particular distribution groups, customized software needed by the employees.

                 

For Examining Attorneys, there is a great dependency on FAST, X-Search and SNAG-IT. Maintaining the functionality of these legacy applications presents an ongoing challenge for the remote use of the laptops by Examining Attorneys. TPAC recognizes that both Trademarks and OCIO must continue to evaluate the correct allocation of resources between maintaining the functionality of legacy applications (such as FAST and X-SEARCH) and building the new, integrated architecture of TMNG, which will eliminate the need for these systems.

                 

During FY 2013, OCIO had to continue to address problems encountered by Examining Attorneys using these systems and to attempt to minimize disruptions to the ability of Examining Attorneys to complete their work in a timely manner. TPAC is pleased to note that, throughout the process, both Trademarks and OCIO have maintained good communication and have worked well together to address these issues while continuing with the development and implementation of TMNG.

             b.    

Separation and Virtualization

                 

Separation of the IT infrastructure for Trademarks from other businesses is intended to mitigate system dependency risks. OCIO is currently working on five legacy systems, and each of those systems are in various stages of testing. These separation projects are currently in accordance with deployment dates announced by OCIO.

                 

Virtualization of the IT infrastructure for Trademarks is intended to increase the agility and scalability of the systems, improve management of the systems, decrease power consumption, and lower maintenance costs. TPAC will focus on two aspects of this project: Trademark Content Management System (TCMS) Phase 1, and Madrid Stabilization.

             c.    

Trademark Content Management System (TCMS)

                 

The goal of TCMS is to improve an internal architectural system used by Examining Attorneys and to give them the ability to accurately review, display and store all content related to a trademark application or registration file, including status and historical information. Currently, Examining Attorneys must retrieve this information from multiple sources; there is no centralized repository for this data. The number one priority of the project is ensuring that all images are migrated into the TCMS. TCMS will accommodate information submitted by applicants as well as content created by the USPTO. There will be different types of content, such as multimedia and video files, and this system will allow for inclusion of other types of file formats that may be developed in the future. Essentially, Examining Attorneys will be able to access all information concerning a case, including multimedia files, through TCMS.

                 

TPAC applauds this effort and strongly encourages OCIO to continue making this project a priority.

             d.    

Madrid Stabilization

                 

OCIO identified a number of issues with the Madrid Processing system. The project to stabilize this system has been categorized into three major areas: 1) improve ability to add new countries as they become members of the Madrid Protocol; 2) implement processing system for transformations that can be incorporated into Trademark docketing systems; and 3) convert incoming paper international applications to XML format.

                 

A Tiger Team Task force has been created to address Madrid stabilization issues. OCIO identified eighty-seven (87) action items related to this project, sixteen of which have been deemed high priority tasks. TPAC congratulates OCIO for focusing on this very important project and for obtaining the necessary funding needed to continue working on the sixteen items.

                 

This project is of great importance to USPTO, particularly because the average cost of processing Madrid Protocol applications is significantly higher per application than traditional trademark applications. Once this project is completed, trademark owners will benefit from reduced processing costs and faster processing time.

             e.    

Business Priorities and Wish List

                 

Trademarks continues to gather input from Managers, employees, the unions that represent them, and from external users of trademark systems on their “wish lists’ for TMNG functionality. OCIO has incorporated the wish list into its business priorities. OCIO reviews the business priorities with Trademarks on a quarterly basis and reorders them accordingly. TPAC encourages the representative constituents to continue to discuss such matters as TMNG progresses towards final conclusion and implementation.

                 

TPAC is encouraged by the good communications and cooperation between Trademark Operations and OCIO. TPAC is mindful, however, that much work still needs to be done and that progress has been slower than originally anticipated on a number of projects. TPAC is encourages Trademarks and OCIO to continue with the completion and implementation of TMNG, as this system currently represents a significant investment by trademark customers, who look forward to beginning to see the benefits of that investment as TMNG systems come on line. TPAC acknowledges the hard work and partnership of OCIO staff, under the leadership of John Owens (Chief Information Officer), Rajeev Dolas (TMNG Portfolio Manager) and Marcie Lovett (Acting Director, Trademark Systems Division). These three members of OCIO met with the IT Subcommittee of TPAC throughout the year to discuss how best to implement TMNG and to keep us current on progress. TPAC is grateful for their patience with explaining highly technical systems and concepts to non-tech savvy members.√

C.      Budget and Funding Issues

    1. Access to Funds - Treatment of User Fees under Sequester.
            

Sequestration refers to a section of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) that went into effect in March 2013 as an austerity fiscal policy with across-the-board spending cuts in all discretionary Federal budgets totaling approximately $85.4 billion. USPTO fees are not exempt from sequestration. The BCA requires these cuts to be applied to actual fee collections beginning in March 2013 at an annualized rate of 5% for FY 2013. In addition, the spending caps in the BCA continue for 10 years. Unless Congress passes legislation to change the law, it will be in effect until 2023.

            

Although the USPTO is funded directly by fees paid by its customers (i.e., trademark and patent owners), the Office may not access the fees it collects unless authorized by Congress. Therefore, the USPTO will be impacted by the sequestration. In FY 2013, Trademarks incurred expenses that were less than its budget request, thanks to good financial management practices. Therefore, the sequestration did not require Trademarks to furlough employees or to reduce its level of service during FY 2013 TPAC has significant concerns, however, about the extent to which Trademarks will be able to continue to deliver on its current initiatives and to provide the level of service that trademark owners rely upon in the event sequestration continues for the foreseeable future. Our Committee will work closely with the USPTO to minimize, to the extent possible, the adverse effects of sequestration on future operations.

            

In our 2012 Annual Report, TPAC applauded the USPTO for seeking comments from users on the adjustment of trademark application filing fees to incentivize complete electronic communication between trademark applicants and the USPTO. The responses from the public indicated a positive reaction to adjustment of fees. However, due to the uncertainty of the budget because of sequestration, it would not be prudent to reduce fees at this time.

            

Trademarks will need its reserve to make adjustments in its budget with the continuing sequestration of Federal discretionary budgets. The TPAC supports this decision by the USPTO and we will continue to monitor the budget to ensure that the same level of service can be provided for trademark applicants.

    2. USPTO use of Activity - Based Cost accounting and expansion to TTAB
            

Since 1997 the USPTO has had an Activity-Based Information System (ABI). Since 2008, Trademarks has been working to expand it to include a TTAB model. The ABI system has been introduced to various operating divisions within Trademarks. The usefulness of the resulting accounting system has fundamentally changed the operations of the USPTO.

            

In FY 2012, the TTAB worked with OCFO to improve their ABI model. With the new information provided by the ABI model, the TTAB made management decisions that greatly improved its metrics for FY 2013. TPAC applauds progress in Trademarks and the TTAB for its use of ABI. The model helps to better identify the cost of specific activities. The ABI model should help leadership in Trademarks make more informed decisions related to spending, fee setting and initiatives to support the mission and goals of the USPTO. TPAC recommends that the Office of OCFO provide additional training in management practices to allow the management team in Trademarks to better utilize the extensive information available in ABI for strategic planning and optimal use of internal resources.

    3. Maintenance of both Trademark AND Patent Fence
            

As stated in the 2012 Annual Report, in FY 2011, the America Invents Acts added a“patent fence,” which prohibits patent fees from being used to fund trademark operations. Historically, Title 35 of the United States Code has contained a “fence” provision that prohibits the USPTO from spending trademark user fees to fund patent operations. With the improvements made in the ABI, the ability to track activities of administrative offices, such as Office of Chief Information Officer, Office of Chief Financial Officer, Office of Administrative Officer, Office of Chief Policy Offices and Director of International Affairs, and Office of General Counsel should greatly enhance the ability of the USPTO to appropriately allocate the cost of “shared services” that are common to both Trademarks and Patents.

            

With the existence of two “fences,” TPAC encourages the Office of the CFO to continue to explore methods that will ensure that an appropriate allocation between trademark and patent fees is made based on the extent of work performed or assigned to either trademarks or patents. While trademark fees account for less than 10% of the total user fees collected by the USPTO, TPAC notes that in certain administrative units, Trademarks contributes a greater percentage of the administrative unit’s expenses.

            

While this may be appropriate in cases where Trademarks consume a greater share of shared resources, TPAC encourages the Office of the CFO to continue to diligently apply the best available models, including ABI, to ensure compliance with both the “trademark fence” and the “patent fence” set forth in Title 35.

            

For example, the Office of Policy and International Affairs is the fastest-growing organizational unit within the USPTO. As it expands, this group is consuming an increasing share of revenue from trademark user fees. Currently, Trademarks contributes 35% of the Office of Policy’s budget while Trademark revenues are less than 10% of the total agency budget. While advising the Executive Branch on IP Policy is a mission of the USPTO, TPAC encourages the careful application of ABI to the activities of the Office of Policy and International Affairs, to ensure that trademark user fees contributed to this organization are in proportion to the amount of time spent on trademark-related matters. The ABI model is an excellent tool for tracking the specific activities of the shared-services administrative offices, TPAC applauds the development and adoption of this model within the USPTO, and we encourage the Office of the CFO to carefully apply ABI to ensure compliance with the statutory “fences” when allocating both trademark user fees and patent user fees.

D.      Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.

    1. Precedential Decisions
            

Continuing the trend of FY 2012, in which there was an increase in the number of precedential decisions (45 as opposed to 38 in FY 2011), the TTAB exceeded its target of 45 decisions for FY 2013, with a total of 49.  The increase in the number of precedential decisions is a positive development because these decisions give trademark owners guidance on substantive trademark issues as well as clarifying evidentiary and procedural issues that arise in practice before the Board. During FY 2013, the TTAB released precedential decisions addressing issues that included: nontraditional marks, such as scents, sounds and flavors; functionality and the failure to function as a mark; procedural issues in inter partes cases, including those dealing with submissions and filings that were not timely; as well as likelihood of confusion, descriptiveness, adequacy of specimens, and others.

    2. Performance Statistics
            

FY 2013 heralded many positive trends at the TTAB. For the first time in several years there were decreases in inventory and/or pendency in many key metrics. The inventory reduction efforts, in particular, resulted in decisions on the merits for older pending cases, and decisions on older contested motions that allowed the cases in which those motions were pending to move forward for eventual settlement or determination on the merits. The Board also developed and released important new dashboards to enable customers to view TTAB data in an understandable visual format. The third edition of the TBMP was also published in a timely fashion. As discussed below in greater detail, with assistance and support from Trademarks, Chief Judge Gerard Rogers and his team worked hard to increase productivity throughout the TTAB, and their collective effort showed.

             a.    Oppositions and Cancellation Proceedings
            

In FY 2013, there was a slight 2.3% increase in the number of oppositions filed, from 5,160 in FY 2012 to 5,278. This continues a trend from FY 2010, where the TTAB began to see a reversal in the decline in filings that had occurred during the economic downturn.

            

Cancellations rose a bit more over FY 2012 levels, increasing 3.4% to 1,513 (vs. 1463 in FY 2012).

             b.    Pendency
            

For the first time in many years, pendency of matters before the TTAB decreased in virtually all performance measures, as discussed more fully below. Significantly, during FY 2013, the TTAB also began to publicly disclose goals on pendency and to measure its performance against those goals. These welcome improvements suggest that the TTAB is beginning a turnaround, and TPAC is confident that, if this level of performance continues, pendency will soon stabilize at target levels.

                  ●    

The pendency of issued final decisions from the ready-for-decision date (RFD) on the merits (that is, either the date the ex parte appeal or inter partes proceeding is submitted for consideration on the briefs or the date of oral hearing, if one was held), was reduced 26.3% to 17.7 weeks, down from the FY 2012 level, when it peaked at 24 weeks. Significantly, while the first two quarters of FY 2013 saw continuing elevated pendency, the significant increase in production of final decisions by the Board’s Administrative Trademark Judges (ATJs) during those quarters cleared out many older cases. This allowed the TTAB to achieve its FY 2013 goal for pendency on final decision (12-14 weeks) during both third quarter (13.9 weeks) and beat it during the fourth quarter (11.3 weeks).

                      

Pendency had dramatically spiked between FY 2009 (when it was at just 6.6 weeks) and FY 2012. TPAC is confident that the lower pendency number reflects a shift toward productivity and output from the TTAB consistent with the volume of cases maturing to ready for decision, as an increased staff of judges, with more assistance (see below), are now processing final decisions on the merits in a more expeditious fashion.

                  ●    

The reduction in pendency was achieved by working off cases at a monthly rate faster than the rate by which cases matured to ready for decision on the merits. The Board’s ATJs increased the number of cases decided by 26.6% from 534 decided in FY 2012 to 676 decided in FY 2013. This reduced inventory of the number of cases awaiting decision to 88 at the end of FY 2013, as compared to 256 cases at the end of FY 2012, a reduction of nearly 66%. This is a significant step in a positive direction, and TPAC is confident that the TTAB will now focus on stabilizing inventory at a level appropriate for both its staffing level and to account for the rate at which cases mature to ready for decision.

                  ●    

The average “end to end” or “commencement to completion” pendency of trial cases (i.e., inter partes cases) was reduced 6.8% to 189.5 weeks, down from 203.3 weeks in FY 2012, and a further improvement over FY 2011 levels of 213.3 weeks. The median pendency of trial cases was reduced 11.3% to 165 weeks in FY 2013, compared to the FY 2012 median of 186 weeks.

                  ●    

For appeals in FY 2013, the average “end to end” processing time was reduced 35.2% to 49.8 weeks from an unusually high average pendency in FY 2012 of 76.8 weeks. Since FY 2012 was a high water mark for average appeals pendency, TPAC is hopeful that in FY 2014 the TTAB will approach average appeal pendency levels consistent with FY 2009 and 2010, in which average pendency for appeal was 44 and 45.5 weeks respectively. Median pendency for appeals in FY 2013 was reduced 17% to 44 weeks down from 53 weeks in FY 2012; and with both the third and fourth quarters of FY 2013 below 40 weeks there is reason to believe that a return of average pendency to the 44-45 week range will be achieved. 

                  ●    

Although pendency decreased in many areas, it rose with respect to disposition of contested motions, from 8.7 weeks in FY 2012 to 13.3 weeks in FY 2013; but this was an expected consequence of the Board’s concerted focus to work down the inventory of cases with older motions. The Board changed its focus from the average pendency of motions in which decisions were completed and mailed (which left out of the picture motions that were pending and undecided) to focus on reducing the average pendency of motions awaiting decision. In this regard, the Board succeeded. At the end of FY 2012, there were contested motions ready for decision that had been lingering for over one year.

            

By contrast, at the end of FY 2013, the age of the oldest contested motion was just 16 weeks, meeting the TTAB’s target. And the average pendency of motions awaiting decision at the end of the year was slightly more than 6 weeks. This reduction in the age of motions awaiting decision is a very positive development, and TPAC feels confident that average pendency of motions disposed of by mailed decisions will also begin to decline as the interlocutory attorneys are able to work consistently on cases in a timely fashion.

            

TPAC also applauds the interlocutory attorneys for meeting its target to reduce the inventory of contested motions ready for decisions from 199 at the end of FY 2012, to 130 at the end of FY 2013; this represents a reduction of 34.7%.  

            

TPAC is heartened by the improvement in the overall TTAB performance in FY 2013.  After many challenging years, the TTAB for the first time since 2009 began to see substantial improvement across the board in most of its metrics.  Total (“end to end”) pendency for appeals, trials and Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR) cases fell, as did the inventory of cases waiting decision at the end of the year and the inventory of contested motions.   Under the leadership of Chief Judge Gerard Rogers, the TTAB saw the addition of four new judges in FY 2013, bringing the total up to 22. While this was a very significant contributing factor to the improved performance of the TTAB, other factors were at play too.

            

First, Trademarks assigned one of its most senior staff, Meryl Hershkowitz, Group Director, to assist Chief Judge Rogers in improving the efficiency of the TTAB. Group Director Hershkowitz provided critical guidance and leadership, and the teamwork exhibited by her and Chief Judge Rogers led to many significant accomplishments. TPAC also commends Commissioner Cohn for providing leadership to the process and for being willing to assign one of the valuable members of her leadership team to the important task of helping to set the TTAB on a positive path. TPAC believes that the cooperation and leadership demonstrated by these individuals will pay significant dividends at the TTAB.

            

Second, the new Managing Attorney for the interlocutory staff, Kenneth Solomon, proved to be a very positive addition to the operation, as he worked with the interlocutory attorneys to bring down the inventory of contested motions. Cheryl Butler, Senior Attorney and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) Editor of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, also continued to play an important role as the third edition of the TBMP was published on schedule and she contributed in many other ways to improve TTAB processes. Deborah Decker continued to support the Chief Judge and all the administrative operations of the TTAB efficiently and effectively.  The development of a strong leadership team at the TTAB has proved well worth the investment as the metrics show. The public who practice before and rely on the TTAB receive the benefit of these improvements. 

            

As TPAC noted last year, the TTAB had just undertaken a work project with examining attorneys from the Trademark Examining Operations being dedicated to assist the judges for approximately four months, working on cases with medium or large records. Some of these attorneys worked on multiple cases consolidated for a single decision, while others worked on multiple, unrelated cases. The size of the respective case records in large part dictated how many cases each participating examining attorney was able to work on. Each participating judge was free to arrange with the detailee how the case work would be done and what tasks the detailee would complete. The arrangements varied but invariably included reviewing and reconciling Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Inquiry System (TTABVUE) prosecution history entries, pleadings, evidence and briefs.

            

Some cases presented legal issues that required research and briefing. Almost all cases involved evidentiary objections and disagreements of the parties that required discussion and resolution by the detailee and supervising Administrative Trademark Judge (ATJ). Digesting and summarizing evidence not stricken or excluded also was a common task for project participants. When drafting the final decisions on the merits, some participants were tasked with drafting discrete sections of decisions that were merged with work the ATJ completed. Other participants drafted entire decisions for ATJ review. And participants were available to cite check and support the writing being done by the ATJs.

            

In addition, in FY 2013 the Board utilized law students as summer externs to work on large record cases in both contested and uncontested matters, and on research projects.

            

While the programs have not been in effect long, and there are undoubtedly best practices and learning that will be developed and shared, it is clear that the use of detailees, and summer externs has helped the TTAB manage caseloads more efficiently.  TPAC supports the TTAB as it continues to look at programs like this to help the judges with cases, particularly those cases with large evidentiary records or complicated proceedings.

            

In its Annual Report for FY 2012, TPAC called upon the TTAB to establish targets, or goals for its performance, and to measure itself against them.  The TTAB has done that with respect to certain key metrics, such as pendency for final decisions, inventory of contested motions ready for decision, and cases decided, and is now reporting its performance versus those goals.  This is also a welcome improvement, as it allows for greater transparency and gives users of the TTAB expectations as to the time the Board itself anticipates for various types of proceedings.

            

Because the TTAB is the tribunal of choice for many trademark owners or applicants, bringing a deep understanding of trademark law and also cost efficiencies in dispute resolution, it is important that the Board maintain its reputation as the place to go to resolve trademark disputes.  Having greater transparency, faster processing of cases, and faster results is important to maintaining the public trust in and reliance upon the TTAB.

             c.    Final Decisions
            

As noted above, the total number of cases decided on the merits increased 26.6% to 676 over FY 2012’s level of 534 cases. This figure is the third highest total of cases ever decided in one year by the Board.

             d.    Active interpartes cases filed Under the “Old” Rules.
            

In November 2007, the TTAB instituted a major rules change that impacted cases filed after that time.  For the last several years, the TTAB has been working on resolving all the "old rule" cases, and has made further significant progress in that regard in FY 2013.  At the end of FY 2012, 166 cases were still pending under the old rules.

            

As of the end of FY 2013, there are 58 cases that the TTAB is monitoring – and 30 of these are necessarily suspended because of the pendency of other civil proceedings, Board cases, or for further consideration of an application by an examining attorney.

            

The TTAB's goals with respect to those “old rule” cases that have been suspended for settlement is to have the cases settle and be removed from the docket, or to move the cases on to discovery and/or trial, under a schedule that allows no further delays.  With cases that are “on track”, the TTAB strategy has included having TTAB interlocutory attorneys set schedules to be adhered to, and ensure discovery is completed on schedule and involving the ATJ for a conference if a party proposes to file a motion for summary judgment between the close of discovery and trial. While TPAC recognizes that there are some cases over which the TTAB has no ability to control, such as those suspended because of a Federal court matter, it applauds the TTAB for being proactive with the parties to ensure cases suspended for settlement are not allowed to remain inactive.  

            

TPAC, like the TTAB, looks forward to the day when the Board will no longer have to operate under two different sets of rules.  

    3. TTAB Manual of Procedure (TBMP)
            

In June, FY 2013, slightly more than a year after the revised Third Edition had been published, the TTAB published the second revision of the Third Edition, which includes practice updates occurring between March 3, 2012, and March 1, 2013, and also incorporates amendments to the Trademark Act, the Trademark Rules of Practice and the Federal Rules, where appropriate and further incorporates, where applicable, the changes to the USPTO’s Code of Professional Responsibility that became effective May 3, 2013.  Revising the Manual on at least an annual basis has been advocated by TPAC for some time, and TPAC happily acknowledges that the TTAB has made a strong start in keeping the TBMP up to date through three consecutive annual revisions, and thus has maintained a guidance document of higher value to the user community.

            

Similar to the use of the IdeaScale® tool in Trademarks, TPAC has encouraged the TTAB to offer a version of the TBMP that will allow users to provide comments and input. This functionality was realized in FY 2013 when the Board posted revised Chapter 1200 (ex parte appeals) for public comment and discussion.  

    4. Accelerated Case Resolution (ACR)
            

The TTAB continued in FY 2013 to advocate that parties adopt ACR, and those cases in which ACR was agreed to by parties showed that ACR does significantly improve the speed at which a matter is resolved.  Because ACR can be adopted by the parties at any time during the pendency of a case, the statistics about ACR are somewhat uneven—greater efficiencies would be realized if parties agreed to ACR options earlier, rather than later in cases. Nonetheless, a close look at available information demonstrates that, even when cases involving later stipulation to use of ACR options are included in the average, ACR provides measurable time-saving benefits. In FY 2013, for example, ACR time pendency was 114.2 weeks, about 40% lower overall (“end to end”) pendency than in a trial involving standard discovery and trial methods.

            

There is considerable information on the TTAB Web site on the availability of ACR, including a list of cases in which it has been used, which was updated in the fourth quarter of FY 2013. The Web site also includes “plug and play” options, including one set suggested by American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA), and another set of possible approaches proposed by the TTAB. Through utilization of any of these options, as proposed or as the parties may wish to amend them, parties can determine a certain time frame for the various steps in its proceedings and tailor the case to fit within the time frame.  

            

The TTAB also continued, throughout the year, to publicly advocate use of ACR; and the Board’s attorneys routinely discuss the options with parties to trial cases, during phone conference, and suggest consideration of ACR in written orders on contested motions.  

            

ACR has been adopted in a variety of ways by parties.  In some cases, the parties have stipulated that the briefs and evidence filed in conjunction with a summary judgment motion can be used as the trial record and briefs, thereby presenting the case for final decision on the merits without the need for traditional trial and briefing. This approach requires the parties to expressly stipulate that the Board can resolve any issues of material fact not stipulated to by the parties or which may have been overlooked or unforeseen by the parties.  Another common approach to ACR involves the parties agreeing upon alternatives to traditional discovery, trial and briefing.  Indeed, a key benefit of ACR is that it is very flexible and the parties can design an approach that meets the needs of their case.  One major hurdle that precludes the adoption of ACR more broadly has been a lack of awareness on the part of practitioners as to its availability and flexibility.  To that end, the TTAB has been very active over the last few years promoting ACR with information on the TTAB Web site, through the major IP organizations with articles, presentations and the like, and through public speeches.

            

While the TTAB has consistently promoted ACR, its adoption is still relatively infrequent. While in FY2012 there were nine cases in which the litigants opted for ACR, in FY2013 there were again only nine cases in which the parties elected some form of ACR. TPAC applauds the efforts of the TTAB to publicize the benefits of ACR and to make ACR readily available to parties with matters pending before the Board. It is the hope of TPAC that parties to TTAB proceedings will increasingly take advantage of this valuable method to more quickly and efficiently resolve disputed trademark issues. TPAC encourages intellectual property associations, Continuing Legal Education (CLE) providers and others to assist in making practitioners more aware of the availability of ACR options in proceedings before the TTAB and in discussing the significant benefits available through the use of ACR. 

    5. TTAB Roundtable on ACR
            

On November 28, 2012, Chief Judge Gerard Rogers convened a TTAB Roundtable to obtain user feedback on the use of Accelerated Case Resolution in TTAB InterPartes Proceedings. TPAC was represented at the Roundtable by Kathryn Barrett Park, and TPAC Member Linda MacLeod also participated, in her capacity as a representative of AIPLA. Moderating the discussion were Chief Judge Rogers and Administrative Trademark Judge Peter Cataldo.

            

During the Roundtable, the following issues were examined

             a.    

What lessons have been learned from ACR cases and other cases employing ACR style efficiencies? How have stakeholders reacted to model schedules for ACR posted on the Board’s web page? What circumstances militate in favor of adopting a model schedule, or for not adopting a model schedule?

             b.    

What impediments exist to broader use of Accelerated Case Resolution options by parties to Board interpartes proceedings? How can reluctance of parties to agree to ACR options be overcome? Are certain types of claims more suited to resolution by an ACR procedure than others? Are certain parties more amenable to ACR?

             c.    

Since a very small percentage of Board cases are processed on a full schedule of discovery, trial and briefing, should one or more ACR processing options be considered for adoption as the default approach for discovery and trial in Board trial proceedings? If so, what showing should a party have to make to obtain full discovery, trial and briefing options? Should the Board consider the default interpartes proceeding to allow full discovery but require an ACR approach to trial and briefing?

             d.    

ACR now can be pursued as an alternative to traditional discovery, trial and briefing only on consent of the parties. Should the rules be amended to allow for a Fast Track proceeding that would allow one party to move for utilization of an ACR procedure upon a particularized showing of need for rapid resolution of the case? If so, what type of showing would be required, and what should be the deadline for seeking utilization of a Fast Track option? Should plaintiffs seeking a Fast Track option have to plead and prove a more significant damage element? Should defendants seeking a Fast Track option have to plead and prove potential damage from the uncertainty created by delay of an application or a cloud on a registration?

             e.    

Open discussion of related issues and future opportunities to dialogue.

                 

Many suggestions were made by the Roundtable participants, and a transcript of the discussion in its entirety is available on the TTAB website.

                 

The TTAB also actively seeks public suggestions on ACR with its dedicated mailbox for ACR: ACRsuggestions@uspto.gov. TPAC hopes that the suggestions are further considered by the Board, and that appropriate action, such as proposed rule-making to implement ACR, are undertaken in FY 2014.

                 

TPAC also would like to see further appropriate actions undertaken that reflect comments received during the Roundtable on processing times at the TTAB. TPAC reported on that Roundtable in the Annual Report in FY 2012. As discussed above, TTAB has set some performance measures, which TPAC trusts are the first wave of a robust set of metrics against which the Board will report its performance publicly.

    6. Creation of TTAB Dashboard
            

In FY 2013, the TTAB introduced a new TTAB Dashboard, to provide users with easy-to-understand visuals showing important TTAB statistics, which is now part of the USPTO Data Visualization Center.  

            

The TTAB dashboards which are in beta, are available to the public and open for public comment, TTABdashboards@uspto.gov.

            

The dashboards report on a quarterly basis the following statistics:

                 

pendency of final decisions and contested motions

                 

the volume and types of new filings

                 

the number of different proceedings pending

                 

pending appeals maturing to Ready-for-Decision (“RFD”)

                 

pending appeals in inventory

                 

the age of pending appeals

                 

pending oppositions and cancellations maturing to RFD

                 

pending oppositions and cancellations in inventory

                 

the age of pending trial cases

                 

trial case contested motions(by type) that are ready for decision

                 

trail case contested motions (by type) in inventory and the age of pending motions (by type)

            

While still being tested, it is clear that these visuals are an enhanced service to the public as they present key metrics in a simple and easy to understand format.

            

The TPAC is excited about the TTAB Dashboards, and very encouraged that further enhancements of the dashboards are contemplated that will contain additional data that users seek, as well as more historical data, which will show trends at the TTAB.  

Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 199 

Errata
                                    Errata

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,567,056 to YU SOK LIM, ET AL of SEOUL
KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ELECTROPHORETIC DISPLAY
DEVICE appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,567,907 to KIA SILVERBROOK of BALMAIN,
AUSTRALIA for PRINTHEAD ASSEMBLY INCORPORATING INK DISTRIBUTION ASSEMBLY
appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted
since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,567,920 to HIROMU MIYAZAWA, ET AL of
AZUMINO-SHI, JAPAN for LIQUID EJECTING HEAD AND LIQUID EJECTING APPARATUS
appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted
since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,567,962 to SHINICHI WAKABAYASHI of
SUWA-SHI, JAPAN for PROJECTOR appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,567,998 to JU-YOUNG YOON, ET AL of
SUWON-SI KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for LIGHT EMITTING DIODE AND LENS FOR THE SAME
appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted
since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,003 to BRIAN E. SIGEL of
PLATTSBURGH, NY for CRYSTAL MOUNTING FRAME AND LIGHT ASSEMBLY appearing in
the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,235 to TETSUYA SASAKI, ET AL of
KYOTO, JAPAN for COMMUNICATION GAME SYSTEM, GAME APPARATUS, SERVER, STORAGE
MEDIUM STORING A PROGRAM, AND GAME CONTROL METHOD appearing in the Official
Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,261 to SEJI TADA, ET AL of NARA,
JAPAN for POWER TRANSMISSION CHAIN AND POWER TRANSMISSION SYSTEM INCLUDING
SAME appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,622 to JUNJI TAKENAKA, ET AL of
SHUNAN-SHI, JAPAN for PHOTOCHROMIC CURABLE COMPOSITION appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,655 to C. EDWARD ECKERT of NEW
KENSINGTON, PA for THERMALLY EFFICIENT, COVER FOR METAL CONTAINMENT VESSEL,
RELATED SYSTEM AND METHODS appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29,
2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,568,885 to DAVID MYUNG, ET AL of SANTA
CLARA, CA for HYDROPHILIC INTERPENETRATING POLYMER NETWORKS DERIVED FROM
HYDROPHOBIC POLYMERS appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,009 to PING LIN, ET AL of SAN DIEGO,
CA for METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR DETECTING RARE CELLS FROM A BIOLOGICAL
SAMPLE appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,118 to CHAOYONG DENG, ET AL of
BEIJING, CHINA for THIN FILM TRANSISTOR LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY ARRAY
SUBSTRATE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF appearing in the Official
Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 200 


   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,266 to JI-HOON SONG, ET AL of
YONGIN-CITY KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for ORGANIC LIGHT-EMITTING DISPLAY DEVICE
AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,290 to AKIHIRO HORI, ET AL of OSAKA,
JAPAN for SULFUR-CONTAINING HETEROCYCLIC DERIVATIVE HAVING BETA SECRETASE
INHIBITORY ACTIVITY appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,293 to NAOTAKE KOBAYASHI, ET AL of
OSAKA-SHI, JAPAN for AMINODIHYDROTHIAZINE DERIVATIVES appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,359 to ROBERTA DIAZ BRINTON, ET AL of
RACHO PALO VERDES, CA for PHYTOESTROGENIC FORMULATIONS FOR ALLEVIATION OR
PREVENTION OF MENOPAUSAL SYMPTOMS appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,365 to PATRICK M. SCHLIEVERT, ET AL
of EDINA, MN for COMPOSITIONS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING INFECTIONS
appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted
since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,475 to JOHN J. ROSSI, ET AL of ALTA
LOMA, CA for METHODS AND COMPOSITIONS FOR THE SPECIFIC INHIBITION OF GENE
EXPRESSION BY DOUBLE-STRANDED RNA appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,523 to SERGEY SELIFONOV, ET AL of
PLYMOUTH, MN for METHOD OF MAKING KETALS AND ACETALS appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,563 to LINDA SHI CHENG, ET AL of
HIGHLAND PARK, IL for ADSORBENTS WITH IMPROVED MASS TRANSFER PROPERTIES AND
THEIR USE IN THE ADSORPTIVE SEPARATION OF PARA-XYLENE appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,682 to KATSUMI SHIBAYAMA, ET AL of
SHIZUOKA, JAPAN for SPECTRAL MODULE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SPECTRAL
MODULE appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,748 to KOICHIRO IIDA, ET AL of
KANAGAWA, JAPAN for CHARGE-TRANSPORTING POLYMER, COMPOSITION FOR ORGANIC
ELECTROLUMINESCENT ELEMENT, ORGANIC ELECTROLUMINESCENT ELEMENT, ORGANIC EL
DISPLAY, AND ORGANIC EL LIGHTING appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,756 to TAKASHI KUSHIDA, ET AL of
HINO-SHI, JAPAN for ALKYLSILANE LAMINATE, PRODUCTION METHOD THEREOF AND
THIN-FILM TRANSISTOR appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,768 to SHUNPEI YAMAZAKI of SETGAYA,
JAPAN for METHOD OF FABRICATING A SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,788 to EIJI MIRAMOTO, ET AL of
KAWASAKI, JAPAN for SEMICONDUCTOR LIGHT EMITTING DEVICE appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 201 

granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,569,978 to TAKUYA TAKEUCHI of OSAKA,
JAPAN for LIGHT-EMITTING ELEMENT DRIVING CIRCUIT SYSTEM appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,057 to TOMMIE EDWARD BERRY, ET AL of
PLEASANTON, CA for METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TESTING DEVICES USING SERIALLY
CONTROLLED INTELLIGENT SWITCHES appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,134 to GEUN YOUNG PARK, ET AL of
SUWON KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for TRANSFORMER appearing in the Official Gazette
of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,136 to GEUN YOUNG PARK, ET AL of
SUWON KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for TRANSFORMER AND FLAT PANEL DISPLAY DEVICE
INCLUDING THE SAME appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,215 to KUMAR ANAND, ET AL of
SHIOJIRI-SHI, JAPAN for POSITION CALCULATION METHOD AND POSITION
CALCULATION APPARATUS appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,282 to TAE YOUNG KANG, ET AL of
UIJEONGBU-SI KOREA, REPUBLIC OF for FLEXIBLE DISPLAY DEVICE AND DATA
DISPLAYING METHOD THEREOF appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29,
2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,458 to AKINORI IZAKI, ET AL of OSAKA,
JAPAN for LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAY DEVICE AND POLARIZING PLATE appearing in
the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,596 to DAIKI IKARI of AYASE-SHI,
JAPAN for IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS CONTROL
METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM CAPABLE OF READING AN IMAGE OF A DOCUMENT TO BE
CONVEYED AND MAKING SKEW FEED CORRECTION appearing in the Official Gazette
of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,598 to AYAKO KANEMOTO of NISSHIN-SHI,
JAPAN for IMAGE SCANNING APPARATUS, COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM, AND IMAGE
STORING METHOD ADD SCANNED IMAGE DATA INTO AN IMAGE FILE STORING AN
EXISTING IMAGE DATA ASSOCIATED WITH AN ATTRIBUTE VALUE OF THE EXISTING
IMAGE DATA. appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,570,934 to JOHN M. BURGAN, ET AL of NORTH
PALM BEACH, FL for MONITORING AND CONTROL OF TRANSMIT POWER IN A
MULTI-MODEM WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE appearing in the Official Gazette
of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,323 to SURANJIT ADHIKARI of
SAN DIEGO, CA for REAL TIME HAND TRACKING, POSE CLASSIFICATION AND
INTERFACE CONTROL appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,324 to TAKAHISA YAMAMOTO, ET AL of
KAWASAKI-SHI, JAPAN for IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND IMAGE PROCESSING
METHOD appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be
deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,457 to KENICHI HASEGAWA, ET AL of
ATSUGI-SHI, JAPAN for FIXING DEVICE AND IMAGE FORMING APPARATUS
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 202 

INCORPORATING SAME appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,516 to ACHILLEAS PAPAKOSTAS, ET AL of
RICHARDSON, TX for SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND APPARATUS TO MONITOR MOBILE
INTERNET ACTIVITY appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013
should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,649 to PIERRE ROY of PARIS, FRANCE
for IRRITATION-REDUCING OCULAR IONTOPHORESIS DEVICE appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,718 to KENSUKE MURATA, ET AL of
FUKUOKA-KEN, JAPAN for CONTROL OF WATER DISCHARGE SYSTEM BY REFLECTED WAVE
DETECTION THRESHOLD(S) appearing in the Official Gazette of October 29,
2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,761 to TATSUYA TAKAGAKI of
NISSIN-SHI, JAPAN for VEHICULAR ILLUMINATING DEVICE appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was
granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,571,868 to PAUL W. SHIELDS, ET AL of
GLASGOW, UNITED KINGDOM for PROGRAM FOR CREATING HIDDEN MARKOV MODEL,
INFORMATION STORAGE MEDIUM, SYSTEM FOR CREATING HIDDEN MARKOV MODEL, SPEECH
RECOGNITION SYSTEM, AND METHOD OF SPEECH RECOGNITION appearing in the
Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent
was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,572,078 to ASHISH GOEL, ET AL of PALO
ALTO, CA for CONTENT RESONANCE appearing in the Official Gazette of October
29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,572,582 to HANAE ISHIZAKA of KAWASAKI,
JAPAN for DATA TRANSMISSION PROGRAM, DATA TRANSMISSION APPARATUS, AND
METHOD FOR EDITING OPERATION MANUAL appearing in the Official Gazette of
October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no patent was granted."

   "All reference to Patent No. 8,572,726 to JASON TYLER GRIFFIN, ET AL of
WATERLOO, CANADA for SIMPLE ALGEBRAIC AND MULTI-LAYER PASSWORDS appearing
in the Official Gazette of October 29, 2013 should be deleted since no
patent was granted."
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 203 

Certificates of Correction
                          Certificates of Correction
                             for November 5, 2013

7,228,876             8,414,034             8,477,886             8,515,154
7,426,216             8,415,289             8,478,699             8,515,806
7,639,181             8,415,471             8,478,769             8,515,973
7,685,178             8,416,847             8,478,921             8,516,273
7,760,954             8,417,082             8,479,732             8,516,478
7,834,136             8,418,993             8,480,130             8,517,186
7,856,423             8,419,546             8,481,767             8,517,208
7,891,174             8,419,691             8,482,883             8,518,236
7,932,888             8,420,388             8,483,072             8,518,623
7,941,434             8,421,532             8,483,181             8,518,640
7,981,423             8,423,165             8,483,273             8,518,806
7,985,196             8,423,674             8,483,310             8,519,032
7,986,152             8,426,414             8,483,919             8,519,324
8,004,484             8,426,753             8,484,470             8,520,374
8,024,237             8,427,084             8,485,304             8,520,728
8,031,140             8,427,667             8,485,559             8,520,807
8,036,987             8,427,810             8,486,918             8,521,017
8,055,643             8,429,249             8,487,252             8,521,316
8,062,686             8,431,410             8,488,108             8,521,526
8,108,406             8,431,738             8,489,611             8,521,811
8,122,973             8,432,367             8,489,811             8,522,042
8,142,789             8,432,798             8,489,943             8,522,281
8,154,153             8,437,293             8,492,141             8,522,457
8,177,943             8,440,071             8,492,356             8,522,468
8,193,380             8,441,416             8,492,443             8,522,614
8,200,509             8,444,492             8,492,758             8,523,075
8,202,343             8,447,162             8,492,972             8,524,232
8,209,319             8,447,580             8,493,542             8,524,785
8,211,386             8,447,624             8,493,566             8,525,208
8,220,544             8,447,719             8,495,017             8,525,501
8,224,801             8,448,860             8,495,377             8,525,954
8,231,416             8,449,597             8,495,716             8,526,102
8,239,003             8,450,469             8,496,090             8,527,756
8,247,371             8,450,924             8,496,215             8,528,072
8,256,005             8,451,052             8,496,457             8,528,325
8,256,989             8,451,590             8,497,741             8,528,575
8,262,605             8,451,666             8,498,176             8,529,595
8,266,692             8,451,906             8,498,291             8,529,849
8,283,954             8,452,151             8,498,451             8,529,898
8,288,922             8,452,368             8,498,836             8,530,369
8,294,536             8,452,619             8,498,915             8,531,336
8,300,222             8,452,626             8,498,931             8,531,772
8,307,996             8,456,272             8,498,974             8,531,912
8,311,990             8,457,121             8,499,377             8,532,032
8,314,990             8,457,491             8,499,532             8,532,850
8,318,906             8,458,097             8,500,764             8,532,965
8,322,958             8,458,336             8,501,427             8,533,027
8,329,178             8,459,666             8,502,216             8,533,109
8,335,739             8,460,401             8,502,232             8,533,183
8,337,520             8,460,645             8,502,735             8,533,198
8,337,824             8,461,317             8,503,259             8,533,500
8,338,777             8,462,477             8,503,509             8,534,419
8,339,262             8,462,617             8,504,382             8,535,112
8,339,626             8,463,072             8,504,482             8,535,122
8,343,615             8,463,139             8,504,527             8,535,392
8,344,054             8,463,652             8,504,759             8,535,429
8,346,622             8,464,203             8,505,578             8,535,650
8,353,858             8,464,249             8,505,587             8,535,691
8,358,447             8,464,403             8,505,715             8,536,746
8,367,490             8,464,539             8,506,638             8,536,750
8,367,548             8,465,246             8,506,715             8,537,042
8,368,773             8,467,648             8,507,225             8,537,046
 November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE 1396 OG 204 

8,376,482             8,468,161             8,507,380             8,537,862
8,378,449             8,468,183             8,507,387             8,537,922
8,379,884             8,468,240             8,507,442             8,538,051
8,380,269             8,469,300             8,507,598             8,538,386
8,383,172             8,471,006             8,507,646             8,538,493
8,384,072             8,471,270             8,507,966             8,538,636
8,384,601             8,472,031             8,508,278             8,539,722
8,385,853             8,472,367             8,508,970             8,539,812
8,386,519             8,472,378             8,509,016             8,541,412
8,386,645             8,472,405             8,509,931             8,542,089
8,388,992             8,472,535             8,510,058             8,542,678
8,390,507             8,472,804             8,510,060             8,542,695
8,392,608             8,473,316             8,510,285             8,542,908
8,393,136             8,473,506             8,510,524             8,543,273
8,393,830             8,474,685             8,510,743             8,543,309
8,399,229             8,474,954             8,510,948             8,543,401
8,403,332             8,475,787             8,511,144             8,544,084
8,404,662             8,475,940             8,511,967             8,548,925
8,404,672             8,476,025             8,512,017             D. 673,850
8,404,741             8,476,511             8,512,261             D. 685,461
8,409,272             8,476,647             8,512,629             D. 688,014
8,409,496             8,476,885             8,512,716             D. 688,498
8,409,562             8,477,595             8,512,935             D. 688,500
8,409,708             8,477,697             8,512,942             D. 688,503
8,409,862             8,477,763             8,514,205             D. 691,066
8,410,057             8,477,765             8,514,371
8,410,150             8,477,795             8,514,645
8,413,381             8,477,803             8,514,725
Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print This Notice 1396 OG 205 

Summary of Final Decisions Issued by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

SUMMARY OF FINAL DECISIONS ISSUED BY THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
October 21, 2013 - October 25, 2013
 

Date Issued Type of Case(1) Proceeding or Appn. Number Party or Parties TTAB Panel (2) Issue(s) TTAB Decision Opposer’s or Petitioner’s mark and goods or services Applicant’s or Respondent’s mark and goods or services Mark and goods or services cited by Examining Attorney Issued as Precedent of TTAB
10-21 EX 85045141
85045149
85045153
Enterprise Database Corporation Quinn
Wolfson
Adlin*
2(e)(1), 23(c), 2(f) All Refusals Affirmed in all applications   ENTERPRISE DATA CORPORATION [various types of computer hardware and software, many for use with databases, data warehousing and transmission of data (Class 9)] [various business consulting services, including those relating to communication and data, e-commerce and business planning (Class 35)] [various consulting services in the design, selection and implementation of computer hardware and software, for a variety of purposes (Class 42)]   No
10-22 OPP
CANC
91195102
92052510
Thomas and Linda Diak dba Dyakcraft (formerly Grafton Fibers)
v.
Crafts Americana Group, Inc.
Quinn
Ritchie
Gorowitz*
2(d), Fraud Opposition Dismissed; Petition to Cancel Granted on 2(d) claim, but denied on Fraud claim "Knitting needle design and crochet hook design" [knitting needles, crochet hooks]; HARMONY [looms] "Knitting needle design" [knitting needles]; HARMONY [knitting needles]   No
10-24 EX 79975267 MarvelousAQL Inc. Bucher*
Bergsman
Ritchie
2(d) Refusal Affirmed   MARVELOUS AQL (and design) [production and distribution of movies] MARVELOUS MEDIA [production and distribution of television shows and movies; production of DVDs featuring documentaries, sporting events, music videos, dramas and comedy] No
10-24 CANC (SJ) 92057343 Nora Elizabeth Pineda Saca and Vanessa Faggiolly
v.
Quesos La Ricura, Ltd.
Quinn
Taylor
Gorowitz
[Opinion "By the Board" (Linnehan)]
Res Judicata Petition to Cancel Denied (motion for summary judgment granted) PERLA BANDERA DE EL SALVADOR [sour cream and cheeses] LA PERLA DE ORIENTE [cheeses]   No
10-25 OPP 91169544 Allergan, Inc.
v.
KRL Group, Inc.
Quinn*
Taylor
Adlin
2(d) Opposition Sustained BOTOX (three registrations) [pharmaceutical preparations, namely, ophthalmic muscle relaxants] [pharmaceutical preparations for the treatment of neurologic disorders] [pharmaceutical preparations for the
treatment of neurological disorders, muscle dystonia, smooth
muscle disorders, autonomic nerve disorders, headaches,
wrinkles, hyperhidrosis, sports injuries, cerebral palsy, spasms, tremors and pain]
BOTULEX [non-medicated skin care preparations for topical application to the skin]   No

(1) EX=Ex Parte Appeal; OPP=Opposition; CANC=Cancellation; CU=Concurrent Use; (SJ)=Summary Judgment; (MD)=Motion to Dismiss; (R)=Request for Reconsideration; (REM)=Decision on Remand (2) *=Opinion Writer; (D)=Dissenting Panel Member

 
 
 



Top of Notices Top of Notices November 26, 2013 US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE Print Appendix 1396 OG 

Mailing and Hand Carry Addresses for Mail to the United States Patent and Trademark Office
                     MAILING AND HAND CARRY ADDRESSES FOR
             MAIL TO THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

              MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS

   For most correspondence (e.g., new patent applications) no mail stop
is required because the processing of the correspondence is routine.
If NO mail stop is included on the list below, no mail stop is required
for the correspondence. See the listing under "Mail to be Directed to the
Director of the Patent And Trademark Office" for additional mail stops
for patent-related correspondence. Only the specified type of document
should be placed in an envelope addressed to one of these special mail
stops. If any documents other than the specified type identified for each
special mail stop are addressed to that mail stop, they will be
significantly delayed in reaching the appropriate area for which they are
intended. The mail stop should generally appear as the first line in
the address.

   Most correspondence may be submitted electronically. See the USPTO's
Electronic Filing System (EFS-Web) internet page
http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/index.jsp for additional
information.

   Please address mail to be delivered by the United States Postal Service
(USPS) as follows:

        Mail Stop _____
        Commissioner for Patents
        P.O. Box 1450
        Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

   If no Mail Stop is indicated below, the line beginning Mail Stop should
be omitted from the address.

   NEW: Effective September 16, 2012, the Mail Stop description for Mail
Stop Ex Parte Reexam is being revised and a new Mail Stop for supplemental
examination requests is being added as Mail Stop Supplemental Examination.

   Except correspondence for Maintenance Fee payments, Deposit Account
Replenishments (see 37 CFR 1.25(c)(4)), and Licensing and Review (see 37 CFR
5.1(c) and 5.2(c)), please address patent-related correspondence to be
delivered by other delivery services (Federal Express (Fed Ex), UPS, DHL,
Laser, Action, Purolator, etc.) as follows:

        United States Patent and Trademark Office
        Customer Service Window, Mail Stop _____
        Randolph Building
        401 Dulany Street
        Alexandria, VA 22314


Mail Stop
Designations            Explanation

Mail Stop 12            Contributions to the Examiner Education Program.

Mail Stop 313(c)        Petitions under 37 CFR 1.313(c) to withdraw a
                        patent application from issue after payment of
                        the issue fee and any papers associated with the
                        petition, including papers necessary for a
                        continuing application or a request for
                        continued examination (RCE).

Mail Stop AF            Amendments and other responses after final
                        rejection (e.g., a notice of appeal (and any
                        request for pre-appeal brief conference)),
                        other than an appeal brief.

Mail Stop Amendment     Information disclosure statements, drawings, and
                        replies to Office actions in patent applications
                        with or without an amendment to the application or
                        a terminal disclaimer. (Use Mail Stop AF for
                        replies after final rejection.)

Mail Stop Appeal        For appeal briefs or other briefs under
 Brief-Patents          part 41 of title 37 of the Code of Federal
                        Regulations (e.g., former 37 CFR 1.192).

Mail Stop               Public comments regarding patent-related
 Comments-Patent        regulations and procedures.


Mail Stop Conversion    Requests under 37 CFR 1.53(c)(2) to convert a
                        nonprovisional application to a provisional
                        application and requests under 37 CFR 1.53(c)(3)
                        to convert a provisional application to a
                        nonprovisional application.

Mail Stop EBC           Mail for the Electronic Business Center including:
                        Certificate Action Forms, Request for Customer
                        Number, and Requests for Customer Number Data
                        Change (USPTO Forms PTO-2042, PTO/SB/124A and 125A,
                        respectively) and Customer Number Upload
                        Spreadsheets and Cover Letters.

Mail Stop Expedited     Only to be used for the initial filing of
 Design                 design applications accompanied by a
                        request for expedited examination under
                        37 CFR 1.155.

Mail Stop Express       Requests for abandonment of a patent
 Abandonment            application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.138,
                        including any petitions under 37 CFR
                        1.138(c) to expressly abandon an
                        application to avoid publication of the
                        application.

Mail Stop               Applications under 35 U.S.C. 156 for patent term
 Hatch-Waxman PTE       extension based on regulatory review of a product
                        subject to pre-market review by a regulating
                        agency. This mail stop is also to be used for
                        additional correspondence regarding the
                        application for patent term extension under
                        35 U.S.C. 156. It is preferred that such initial
                        requests be hand-carried to:

                        Office of Patent Legal Administration
                        Room MDW 7D55
                        600 Dulany Street (Madison Building)
                        Alexandria, VA 22314

Mail Stop ILS           Correspondence relating to international patent
                        classification, exchanges and standards.

Mail Stop Issue Fee     All communications following the receipt of a
                        PTOL-85, "Notice of Allowance and Fee(s)
                        Due," and prior to the issuance of a patent
                        should be addressed to Mail Stop Issue Fee,
                        unless advised to the contrary.

                        Assignments are the exception. Assignments
                        (with cover sheets) should be faxed to
                        571-273-0140, electronically submitted
                        (http://epas.uspto.gov), or submitted in a
                        separate envelope and sent to Mail Stop
                        Assignment Recordation Services,
                        Director - U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
                        as shown below.

Mail Stop L&R           All documents pertaining to applications subject
                        to secrecy order pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 181, or
                        national-security classified and required to be
                        processed accordingly. Such papers, petitions for
                        foreign filing license pursuant to 37 CFR 5.12(b)
                        for which expedited handling is requested, and
                        petitions for retroactive license under 37 CFR
                        5.25 may also be hand carried to Licensing and
                        Review:

                        Technology Center 3600, Office of the Director
                        Room 4B41
                        501 Dulany Street (Knox Building)
                        Alexandria, VA 22314

Mail Stop Missing       Requests for a corrected filing receipt and
 Parts                  replies to OPAP notices such as the Notice
                        of Omitted Items, Notice to File Corrected
                        Application Papers, Notice of Incomplete
                        Application, Notice to Comply with Nucleotide
                        Sequence Requirements, and Notice to File Missing
                        Parts of Application, and associated papers and
                        fees.

Mail Stop MPEP          Submissions concerning the Manual of Patent
                        Examining Procedure.

Mail Stop Patent Ext.   Applications for patent term extension or
                        adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 and any
                        communications relating thereto. This mail stop
                        is limited to petitions for patent term extension
                        under 35 U.S.C. 154 for applications filed
                        between June 8, 1995 and May 29, 2000, and patent
                        term adjustment (PTA) under 35 U.S.C. 154 for
                        applications filed on or after May 29, 2000.
                        For applications for patent term extension under
                        35 U.S.C. 156, use Mail Stop Hatch-Waxman PTE.
                        For applications for patent term extension or
                        adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154 that are mailed
                        together with the payment of the issue fee, use
                        Mail Stop Issue Fee.

Mail Stop Patent        Submission of comments regarding search templates.
 Search Template
 Comments

Mail Stop PCT           Mail related to international applications filed
                        under the Patent Cooperation Treaty in the
                        international phase and in the national phase
                        under 35 U.S.C. 371 prior to mailing of a
                        Notification of Acceptance of Application Under
                        35 U.S.C. 371 and 37 CFR 1.495 (Form
                        PCT/DO/EO/903).

Mail Stop Petition      Petitions to be decided by the Office of Petitions,
                        including petitions to revive and petitions to
                        accept late payment of issue fees or maintenance
                        fees.

Mail Stop PGPUB         Correspondence regarding publication of patent
                        applications not otherwise provided, including:
                        requests for early publication made after filing,
                        rescission of a non-publication request, corrected
                        patent application publication, and refund of
                        publication fee.

Mail Stop Post          In patented files: requests for changes of
 Issue                  correspondence address, powers of attorney,
                        revocations of powers of attorney, withdrawal as
                        attorney or agent and submissions under 37
                        CFR 1.501. Designation of, or changes to, a fee
                        address should be addressed to Mail Stop M
                        Correspondence. Requests for Certificate of
                        Correction need no special mail stop, but
                        should be mailed to the attention of Certificate
                        of Correction Branch.

Mail Stop RCE           Requests for continued examination under
                        37 CFR 1.114.

Mail Stop               Correspondence pertaining to the reconstruction
 Reconstruction         of lost patent files.

Mail Stop Ex Parte      Original requests for Ex Parte Reexamination
 Reexam                 and all subsequent correspondence other
                        than correspondence to the Office of the Solicitor
                        (see 37 CFR 1.1(a)(3) and 1.302(c)). Effective
                        September 16, 2012, this mail stop is also to be
                        used for any papers to be filed in an ex parte
                        reexamination proceeding ordered as a result of
                        a supplemental examination proceeding.

Mail Stop Inter         Original requests for Inter Partes Reexamination
 Partes Reexam          and all subsequent correspondence other than
                        correspondence to the Office of the Solicitor
                        (see 37 CFR 1.1(a)(3) and 1.302(c)).

Mail Stop Reissue       All new and continuing reissue application filings.

Mail Stop Sequence      Submission of the computer readable form (CRF) for
                        applications with sequence listings, when the CRF
                        is not being filed with the patent application.

Mail Stop Supplemental  (Effective September 16, 2012). Requests for
 Examination            Supplemental Examination, including original
                        request papers and any other correspondence, other
                        than correspondence to the Office of the
                        Solicitor (see 37 CFR Secs. 1.1(a)(3) AND 1.302(c)).
                        This mail stop is limited to original request papers
                        and any other papers that are to be filed in a
                        supplemental examination proceeding. For any papers
                        to be filed in an ex parte reexamination proceeding
                        ordered as a result of a supplemental examination
                        proceeding, use "Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam".

Information for addressing patent-related correspondence may also be found
on the USPTO's web site at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/mail.jsp.


            MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR TRADEMARKS

   Please address trademark-related correspondence to be delivered by the
United States Postal Service (USPS), except documents sent to the Assignment
Services Division for recordation, requests for copies of trademark
documents, and documents directed to the Madrid Processing Unit, as follows:

        Commissioner for Trademarks
        P.O. Box 1451
        Alexandria, VA 22313-1451

   Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Office's Madrid Processing Unit,
must be mailed to:

        Madrid Processing Unit
        600 Dulany Street
        MDE-7B87
        Alexandria, VA 22314-5796

   Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Office's Deputy Commissioner for
Trademark Policy regarding Letters of Protest must be mailed to:

        Letter of Protest
        ATTN: Deputy Commissioner for Trademark Policy
        600 Dulany Street
        Alexandria, VA 22314-5796

   Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Director regarding the Fastener
Quality Act (FQA) must be mailed to:

        Director, USPTO
        ATTN: FQA
        600 Dulany Street, MDE-10A71
        Alexandria, VA 22314-5793

   Mail to be delivered by the USPS to the Commissioner regarding the
recordal of a Native American Tribal Insignia (NATI) must be mailed to:

        Native American Tribal Insignia
        ATTN: Commissioner for Trademarks
        600 Dulany Street
        MDE-10A71
        Alexandria, VA 22314-5793

Do NOT send any of the following via USPS certified mail or with a
"signature required" option: submissions to the Madrid Processing Unit,
Letters of Protest, applications for recordal of insignia under the
Fastener Quality Act, notifications of Native American Tribal Insignia.

   Trademark-related mail to be delivered by hand or other private courier
or delivery service (e.g., UPS, Federal Express) to the Trademark Operation,
the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, or the Office's Madrid Processing Unit,
must be delivered to:

        Trademark Assistance Center
        Madison East, Concourse Level Room C 55
        600 Dulany Street
        Alexandria, VA 22314

Information for addressing trademark-related correspondence may also be found
on the USPTO's web site at http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/mail.jsp.


           MAIL TO BE DIRECTED TO THE DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES
                          PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

   Please address correspondence to be directed to a mail stop identified
below to be delivered by the United States Postal Service (USPS) as follows
(unless otherwise instructed):

        Mail Stop _____
        Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
        P.O. Box 1450
        Alexandria, VA 22313-1450

Mail Stop
Designations            Explanation

Mail Stop 3             Mail for the Office of Personnel from NFC.

Mail Stop 6             Mail for the Office of Procurement.

Mail Stop 8             All papers for the Office of the Solicitor except
                        communications relating to pending litigation and
                        disciplinary proceedings; papers relating to pending
                        litigation in court cases shall be mailed only to
                        Office of the Solicitor, P.O. Box 15667, Arlington,
                        VA 22215 and papers related to pending disciplinary
                        proceedings before the Administrative Law Judge or
                        the Director shall be mailed only to the Office of
                        the Solicitor, P.O. Box 16116, Arlington, VA 22215.

Mail Stop 11            Mail for the Electronic Ordering Service (EOS).

Mail Stop 13            Mail for the Employee and Labor Relations Division.

Mail Stop 16            Mail related to refund requests, other than
                        requests for refund of a patent application
                        publication fee. Such requests should be directed
                        to Mail Stop PGPub.

Mail Stop 17            Invoices directed to the Office of Finance.

Mail Stop 24            Mail for the Inventor's Assistance Program,
                        including complaints about Invention Promoters.

Mail Stop 171           Vacancy Announcement Applications.

Mail Stop Assignment    All assignment documents, security interests,
 Recordation Services   and other documents to be recorded in the
                        Assignment records. Note that documents with
                        cover sheets that are faxed to 571-273-0140 or
                        submitted electronically (http://epas.uspto.gov)
                        are processed much more quickly than those
                        submitted by mail.

Mail Stop Document      All requests for certified or uncertified
 Services               copies of patent or trademark documents.

Mail Stop EEO           Mail for the Office of Civil Rights.

Mail Stop External      Mail for the Office of External Affairs.
 Affairs

Mail Stop Interference  Communications relating to interferences and
                        applications and patents involved in interference.

Mail Stop M             Mail to designate or change a fee
 Correspondence         address, or other correspondence related to
                        maintenance fees, except payments of
                        maintenance fees in patents. See below for
                        the address for maintenance fee payments.

Mail Stop OED           Mail for the Office of Enrollment and Discipline.


                           Maintenance Fee Payments

   Unless submitted electronically over the Internet at www.uspto.gov,
payments of maintenance fees in patents should be mailed through the
United States Postal Service to:

        United States Patent and Trademark Office
        P.O. Box 979070
        St. Louis, MO 63197-9000

   Alternatively, payment of maintenance fees in patents (Attn: Maintenance
Fee) using hand-delivery and delivery by private courier may be made to:

        Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
        Attn: Maintenance Fee
        2051 Jamieson Avenue, Suite 300
        Alexandria, Virginia 22314


                        Deposit Account Replenishments

   To send payment to replenish deposit accounts, send the payments through
the United States Postal Service to:

        United States Patent and Trademark Office
        P.O. Box 979065
        St. Louis, MO 63197-9000

   Alternatively, deposit account replenishments (Attn: Deposit Accounts)
using hand-delivery and delivery by private courier (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.)
may be delivered to:

        Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
        Attn: Deposit Accounts
        2051 Jamieson Avenue, Suite 300
        Alexandria, VA 22314

   Information abount deposit account replenishments may also be found on
the USPTO's web site at
http://www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cfo/finance/Deposit_Account_
Replenishments.jsp
Top of Notices Top of Notices
Reference Collections of U.S. Patents Available for Public Use in Patent and Trademark Resource Centers
             Reference Collections of U.S. Patents Available for
             Public Use in Patent and Trademark Resource Centers

The following libraries, designated as Patent and Trademark Resource Centers
(PTRCs), provide public access to patent and trademark information received
from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). This
information includes all issued patents, all registered trademarks, the
Official Gazette of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, search tools such
as the Cassis CD-ROM suite of products and supplemental information in a
variety of formats including online, optical disc, microfilm and paper.
Each PTRC also offers access to USPTO resources on the Internet and to
PubWEST (Web based examiner search tool), a system used by patent examiners
that is not available on the Internet.

Staff assistance and training is provided in the use of this information.
All information is available free of charge. However, there may be charges
associated with the use of photocopying and related services. Hours of
service to the public vary, and anyone contemplating use of these
collections at a particular library is urged to contact that library in
advance about its services and hours to avoid inconvenience.

State                   Name of Library                  Telephone Contact

Alabama                 Auburn University Libraries         (334) 844-1737
                        Birmingham Public Library           (205) 226-3620
Alaska                  Fairbanks: Keith B. Mather Library,
                        Geophysical Institute,
                        University of Alaska, Fairbanks     (907) 474-2636
Arizona                 Phoenix, Arizona
                        State Library of Arizona
                        Arizona State Library Archives
                        and Public Records                  (602) 926-3870
Arkansas                Little Rock: Arkansas State
                        Library                             (501) 682-2053
California              Los Angeles Public Library          (213) 228-7220
                        Riverside: University of
                        California, Riverside, Orbach
                        Science Library                     (951) 827-3316
                        Sacramento: California State
                        Library                             (916) 654-0261
                        San Diego Public Library            (619) 236-5800
                        San Francisco Public Library        (415) 557-4500
                        Sunnyvale Public Library            (408) 730-7300
Colorado                Denver Public Library               (720) 865-1711
Connecticut             Fairfield: Ryan-Matura Library
                        Sacred Heart University             (203) 371-7726
Delaware                Newark: University of Delaware
                        Library                             (302) 831-2965
Dist. of Columbia       Washington: Howard University
                        Libraries                           (202) 806-7252
Florida                 Fort Lauderdale: Broward County
                        Main Library                        (954) 357-7444
                        Miami-Dade Public Library           (305) 375-2665
                        Orlando: University of Central
                        Florida Libraries                   (407) 823-2562
Georgia                 Atlanta: Library and Information
                        Center, Georgia Institute of
                        Technology                          (404) 385-7185
Hawaii                  Honolulu: Hawaii State Library      (808) 586-3477
Illinois                Chicago Public Library              (312) 747-4450
                        Macomb:  Western Illinois
                        University Libraries                (309) 298-2722
Indiana                 Indianapolis-Marion County Public
                        Library                             (317) 269-1741
                        West Lafayette Siegesmund
                        Engineering Library,
                        Purdue University                   (765) 494-2872
Iowa                    Davenport: Davenport Public Library (563) 326-7832
Kansas                  Wichita: Ablah Library, Wichita
                        State University                  1 (800) 572-8368
Kentucky                Louisville Free Public Library      (502) 574-1611
                        W. Frank Steely Library
                        Northern Kentucky University
                        Highland Heights, Kentucky          (859) 572-5457
Louisiana               Baton Rouge: Troy H. Middleton
                        Library, Louisiana State University (225) 388-8875
Maine                   Orono: Raymond H. Fogler Library,
                        University of Maine                 (207) 581-1678
Maryland                Baltimore: University of Baltimore
                        Law Library                         (410) 837-4554
                        College Park: Engineering and
                        Physical Sciences Library,
                        University of Maryland              (301) 405-9157
Massachusetts           Amherst: Physical Sciences Library,
                        University of Massachusetts         (413) 545-2765
                        Boston Public Library               (617) 536-5400
                                                                 Ext. 4256
Michigan                Ann Arbor: Art, Architecture &
                        Engineering Library,
                        University of Michigan              (734) 647-5735
                        Big Rapids: Ferris Library for
                        Information, Technology &
                        Education, Ferris State
                        University                          (231) 592-3602
                        Detroit: Public Library             (313) 481-1391
                        Michigan Technological
                        University, Van Pelt and
                        Opie Library, Houghton              (906) 487-2500
Minnesota               Hennepin County Library
                        Minneapolis Central Library         (612) 543-8000
Mississippi             Jackson: Mississippi Library
                        Commission                          (601) 961-4111
Missouri                Kansas City: Linda Hall Library     (816) 363-4600
                                                                  Ext. 724
                        St. Louis Public Library            (314) 352-2900
Montana                 Butte: Montana Tech Library of
                        the University of Montana           (406) 496-4281
Nebraska                Lincoln: Engineering Library,
                        University of Nebraska-Lincoln      (402) 472-3411
New Hampshire           Concord: University of New
                        Hampshire School of Law             (603) 513-5130
Nevada                  Reno: University of Nevada, Reno,
                        Mathewson-IGT Knowledge Center      (775) 784-6500
                                                                  Ext. 257
New Jersey              Newark Public Library               (973) 733-7779
                        Piscataway: Library of Science and
                        Medicine, Rutgers University        (732) 445-2895
New York                Albany: New York State Library      (518) 474-5355
                        Buffalo and Erie County Public
                        Library                             (716) 858-7101
                        Rochester Public Library            (716) 428-8110
                        New York: New York Public Library,
                        Science Industry & Business Library (212) 592-7000
North Carolina          Charlotte: J. Murrey Atkins
                        Library,                            (704) 687-2241
                        University of North Carolina at
                        Charlotte                           (919) 515-2935
North Dakota            Grand Forks: Chester Fritz Library,
                        University of North Dakota          (701) 777-4888
Ohio                    Akron - Summit County Public        (330) 643-9075
                        Library
                        Cincinnati and Hamilton County,
                        Public Library of                   (513) 369-6932
                        Cleveland Public Library            (216) 623-2870
                        Dayton: Paul Laurence Dunbar
                        Library, Wright State University    (937) 775-3521
                        Toledo/Lucas County Public Library  (419) 259-5209
Oklahoma                Stillwater: Oklahoma State
                        University Edmon Low Library        (405) 744-6546
Pennsylvania            Philadelphia, The Free Library of   (215) 686-5394
                        Pittsburgh, Carnegie Library of     (412) 622-3138
                        University Park: PAMS Library,
                        Pennsylvania State University       (814) 865-7617
Puerto Rico             Bayamon: Learning Resources Center,
                        University of Puerto Rico           (787) 993-0000
                                                                 Ext. 3222
                        Mayaquez General Library,
                        University of Puerto Rico           (787) 832-4040
                                                                 Ext. 2023
                        Bayamon, Learning Resources Center,
                        University of Puerto Rico           (787) 786-5225
Rhode Island            Providence Public Library           (401) 455-8027
South Carolina          Clemson University Libraries        (864) 656-3024
South Dakota            Rapid City: Devereaux Library,
                        South Dakota School of Mines and
                        Technology                          (605) 394-1275
Tennessee               Nashville: Stevenson Science and
                        Engineering Library, Vanderbilt
                        University                          (615) 322-2717
Texas                   Austin: McKinney Engineering
                        Library, University of Texas at
                        Austin                              (512) 495-4511
                        College Station: West Campus
                        Library, Texas A & M University     (979) 845-2111
                        Dallas Public Library               (214) 670-1468
                        Houston: The Fondren Library, Rice
                        University                          (713) 348-5483
                        Lubbock: Texas Tech University      (806) 742-2282
                        San Antonio Public Library          (210) 207-2500
Utah                    Salt Lake City: Marriott Library,
                        University of Utah                  (801) 581-8394
Vermont                 Burlington: Bailey/Howe Library,
                        University of Vermont               (802) 656-2542
Washington              Seattle: Engineering Library,
                        University of Washington            (206) 543-0740
West Virginia           Morgantown: Evansdale Library,
                        West Virginia University            (304) 293-4695
Wisconsin               Wendt Commons Library,
                        University of Wisconsin-Madison     (608) 262-0696
                        Milwaukee Public Library            (414) 286-3051
Wyoming                 Cheyenne: Wyoming State Library     (307) 777-7281
Top of Notices Top of Notices
Patent Technology Centers
PATENT TECHNOLOGY CENTERS
AVERAGE FILING DATE OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVING A FIRST OFFICE ACTION IN THE LAST 3 MONTHS1
Technology
Center
GAU Avg Filing Date
1600 BIOTECHNOLOGY, AND ORGANIC CHEMISTRY
  1610 11/24/2012
  1620 09/30/2012
  1630 08/03/2012
  1640 10/15/2012
  1650 10/09/2012
  1660 06/25/2012
  TOTAL 09/30/2012
     
1700 CHEMICAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING AND DESIGNS
  1710 01/28/2012
  1720 05/22/2012
  1730 07/13/2012
  1740 05/25/2012
  1750 02/24/2012
  1760 08/12/2012
  1770 03/26/2012
  1780 05/13/2012
  1790 08/15/2012
  TOTAL 05/13/2012
     
2100 COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE AND SOFTWARE
  2110 04/04/2012
  2120 01/16/2012
  2140 01/31/2012
  2150 07/22/2012
  2160 07/10/2012
  2170 01/13/2012
  2180 03/13/2012
  2190 12/19/2011
  TOTAL 03/16/2012
     
2400 NETWORKING, MULTIPLEXING, CABLE AND SECURITY
  2410 04/25/2012
  2420 09/24/2012
  2430 08/06/2012
  2440 03/29/2012
  2450 04/19/2012
  2460 03/01/2012
  2470 03/01/2012
  2480 12/01/2011
  2490 06/28/2012
  TOTAL 04/16/2012
     
2600 COMMUNICATIONS
  2610 12/10/2011
  2620 12/16/2011
  2630 05/19/2012
  2640 06/07/2012
  2650 03/22/2012
  2660 04/25/2012
  2670 02/27/2012
  2680 04/07/2012
  2690 12/22/2011
  TOTAL 03/22/2012
     
2800   SEMICONDUCTORS/MEMORY, CIRCUITS/MEASURING AND TESTING, OPTICS/PHOTOCOPYING
  2810 08/22/2012
  2820 09/12/2012
  2830 04/07/2012
  2840 04/16/2012
  2850 04/10/2012
  2860 10/13/2011
  2870 05/07/2012
  2880 05/31/2012
  2890 08/25/2012
  TOTAL 05/16/2012
     
2900    
  2910 12/09/2012
  TOTAL 12/09/2012
     
3600     TRANSPORTATION, CONSTRUCTION, ELECTRONIC COMMERCE, AGRICULTURE, NATIONAL SECURITY AND LICENSE AND REVIEW
  3610 07/31/2012
  3620 04/19/2012
  3630 08/12/2012
  3640 03/29/2012
  3650 03/22/2012
  3660 06/03/2012
  3670 06/03/2012
  3680 05/25/2012
  3690 10/21/2012
  TOTAL 06/07/2012
     
3700   MECHANICAL ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING AND PRODUCTS
  3710 06/28/2012
  3720 02/06/2012
  3730 04/19/2012
  3740 08/29/2011
  3750 02/03/2012
  3760 06/13/2012
  3770 05/07/2012
  3780 05/25/2012
  TOTAL 02/24/2012
     
  1 Report last updated on 10-31-2013.
Top of Notices Top of Notices