ContactSPE Performance Appraisal Plan-Award Taskforce
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 by Jim Ruttler.
The role of the Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) is critical and David Kappos, Director of the USPTO, has acknowledged this fact by restructuring the Performance Appraisal Plan (PAP) and award program for SPE’s. “The SPE PAP-Award Taskforce has crafted a performance appraisal plan that reflects key priorities of the Patents organization: enhanced examination quality, reduced application pendency and improved stakeholder responsiveness.” As first-line managers and trainers to 13-20 patent examiners, SPE’s are key players in aiding the USPTO to achieve organizational goals and to overcome challenges that have arisen from globalization and the ability to diffuse information at a rapid pace. According to the USPTO Web site, the new SPE PAP includes:
•Quality (of work) element (25%)
•Pendency Reduction element (25%)
•Stakeholder Responsiveness element (20%)
•Coaching/Mentoring (to examiners) element (15%)
•Leadership element (15%)
The USPTO invites feedback from internal and external stakeholders with regards to the SPE PAP-Award Task Force. Feedback can be sent to spepapawardtaskforce@uspto.gov.
Broad Patents: Balancing protection and the diffusion of knowledge.
Posted Wednesday, December 30, 2009 by Jim Ruttler.
The USPTO continues to confront the challenge of finding a balance between patent protection and diffusion of knowledge. Information and knowledge drive innovation; however, broad patent protection may limit access to those tools needed to guide novelty and improvement. The holder of a patent obtains exclusive rights to their own invention as well as other inventions which are found to be functionally equivalent. “Patents that are too broad allow their holders to “pre-empt the future”, while patents that are too narrow discourage research that feeds into follow-on inventions.” Increased globalization and the ability to diffuse information at a rapid pace via the Internet are prompting innovative companies and individuals to seek improved patent protection. The USTPO has responded to these needs over the past two decades by offering broader protection, especially in newer areas such as software and bio-technology. These broader “patent claims often cover far more than what the inventor actually discovered or invented.” Additionally, patent filing has become more flexible as a means to promote innovation. However, these changes have prompted some to question the quality of issued patents. Patent protection that is too broad or that protect inventions of limited novelty may be perceived as low-quality. These types of patents can be costly to society; “their proliferation not only swells the number of patents and patent applications that must be reviewed by potential innovators and patent offices, but also creates uncertainty about the validity and enforcement of patents more generally.” As technology continues to advance and new areas of patentability are discovered, the USPTO will face greater challengers with regards to balancing patent protection and innovation.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/12/24508541.pdf
2009 Performance and Accountability Report
Posted Tuesday, December 22, 2009 by Jim Ruttler.
The four guiding principles for the USPTO’s 2007-2012 Strategic Plan are: Quality, Timeliness, Cost-Effectiveness and Transparency. The strategic goals that have stemmed from these principles are to optimize patent quality and timeliness; optimize trademark quality and timeliness; and improve intellectual property protection and enforcement domestically and abroad. The Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2009 discusses the results as they pertain to the 2007-2012 Strategic Plan and highlights the challenges management will continue to face in the future. One of the biggest challenges for the USPTO is to address the backlog of patent applications and the growth of pendency. One pilot initiative designed to alleviate the backlog issue is “The First Action Interview Program”. This program “provides the applicant the opportunity to resolve patentability issues one-on-one with the examiner at the beginning of the prosecution process, and facilitates possible early allowance.” Another means for reducing pendency is to continue encouraging applicants to file documents via USPTO’s web based programs; to eliminate paper documents and to promote the electronic workplace. In FY 2009, 82.5% of patent applications were filed electronically; 2.5% higher than the 2009 target. According to the report and USPTO director David Kappos, “for the fourth year in a row, the Trademark organization met all of its goals, focusing on pendency, quality and e-government efforts”.
http://uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/2009/2009annualreport.pdf
Patent Reform
Posted Friday, December 18, 2009 by Jim Ruttler.
The year 2009 marks the first year since 1996 that the USPTO has seen a decline in U.S patent applications. One reason for this may be the recession coupled with rising patent application and patent enforcement. The decrease in filings has had a direct effect on the Patent Office because of its reliance on patent fees to support operations, thereby making it even more difficult to address the growing backlog of applications. However, change appears to be on the way with patent reform bills being considered by Congress and the President’s announcement that $100 million dollars will be committed to research and development in an effort to accelerate the patent review process for “green” technologies. More information can be found at the following link.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/12/11/news/economy/patent_filings/index.htm
Unified EU Patent System
Posted Monday, December 14, 2009 by Jim Ruttler.
The European Union (EU) council announced on December 4, 2009 that agreements had been reached on a general approach to the draft regulation on the EU Patent. The European Commission (EC) has long argued that a fragmented patent system and the absence of a single European Patent have impeded the growth of technologies companies in the EU. The disjointed system that is currently in place results in excessive costs, complexity and legal uncertainties that arise from various contradictory Court decisions issued in Member states. A Community Patent will simplify obtainment of patent protection and reduce costs incurred for protection of innovations in the EU. To date, patent protection in 13 EU states costs innovators 11 times as much as an innovator pays for patent protection in the United States. “The EU council agreed on certain features of a patent court which has exclusive jurisdiction in respect of infringement and validity issues concerning European and EU patents. The draft agreement is currently being examined by the European Court of Justice which has to deliver an opinion on the compatibility of the draft agreement with the EC Treaty. The opinion is expected at the earliest by summer 2010.”
http://www.epo.org/topics/news/2009/20091208.html
‹‹ Newer Entries | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | Older Entries ››