IT architecture project planning - IP-center

Project/Service COOPERATION FUND 

Status DRAFT 

OFFICE FOR HARMONIZATION IN THE INTERNAL MARKET 

(TRADE MARKS AND DESIGNS) 

COOPERATION FUND PROGRAMME SUPPORT OFFICE 

PROJECT BRIEF 

CF1.2.10 – Common Examiner’s Support Tool 

(CESTO) 

Approved by owner NW Nathan Wajsman Director QMD 

Authors JC Jaime Cos Codina Business Lead, QMD 

ML Melanie Loveday Project Manager, QMD 

Contributors JRR Juan Ramón Rubio Director, TMD 

RT Richard Thewlis Legal Adviser, TMD 

MK Mark Kennedy Examiner, TMD 

DE Diego Eguidazu ITD 

SD Sofie Declercq PSO 

SW Simon White Programme Manager 

Version 1.1 – 11/10/2010

Cooperation Fund Common Examiner‟s Support Tool 

Version Date Author Description 

0.1 29/06/2010 JC Initial Draft. 

Revision History 

0.2 31/08/2010 JC Added the description of the High Level functionalities of the tool 

0.3 09/09/2010 JC Added estimation on planning & costs for current proposal. Added 

alternative, with planning & costs 

0.4 20.09.2010 JC Modified the document’s structure to present several alternatives and 

propose a choice. The project plan is adapted to the suggested 

alternative and the differences with the other possibilities are highlighted. 

Added list of deliverables and further detailed planning. 

0.5 07.10.2010 JC Adding remarks from Melanie Loveday, Project Manager. 

1.0 09.10.2010 ML Results of the Harmonization process between all Cooperation Fund 

Project Briefs 

1.1 11.10.2010 SW Minor amendments for Gate 2 

Clarity of language 

Consistency of facts and figures 

Presentation 

Objectives clearly defined 

Expectation of OHIM for POs clearly stated 

Quality Criteria (to be used by reviewers) 

Page 2 / 34


1. PROJECT DEFINITION 5 

1.1. Introduction 5 

1.1.1. About this document 5 

1.1.2. Background: The Examiner‟s Support Tool Prototype of OHIM‟s Lab 5 

1.2. The Challenge 6 

1.3. Objectives 7 

1.4. Expected benefits 7 

2. PROJECT PLAN 9 

2.1. Project Approach 9 

2.1.1. Overall approach 9 

2.1.2. Scope and exclusions 11 

2.1.3. Constraints 11 

2.2. Project team and stakeholders’ organisation 11 

2.2.1. Roles and responsibilities 12 

2.2.2. Assignments 14 

2.2.3. Recruitment 15 

2.3. Work description 15 

2.3.1. Tasks and activities 15 

2.3.2. Major deliverables and acceptance criteria 17 

2.4. Project planning tools 18 

2.5. Project time plan 19 

2.6. Project cost estimates 21 

2.7. Project tolerances 21 

2.8. Risk analysis 21 

2.8.1. Risk Types 21 

2.8.2. Risk Register 22 

Page 3 / 34


2.9. Key dependencies 24 

2.10. Project plan and schedule reporting procedure 25 

2.11. Quality management 26 

2.12. Communications and knowledge management 28 

2.13. Closing-out strategy 28 

3. ANNEXES 29 

3.1. ANNEX 1 - Definitions, acronyms and abbreviations 29 

3.2. ANNEX 2 - EST « Lessons Learnt » 30 

3.3. ANNEX 3 - Interest shown by the Participating Offices 32 

3.4. ANNEX 4 - Profiles for PO Project Team Members 33 

3.5. ANNEX 5 - Potential Services and Indicators available via internal data resources 34 

Page 4 / 34


1. Project Definition 

1.1. Introduction 

1.1.1. About this document 

This document has been produced to capture a “first cut” view of the scope, investment needed, dependencies on other 

projects and anticipated payback so that the constituent parts of the project, herein referred to as the “Project”, can be 

prioritized, funded and authorized. This Project Brief will provide the basis for the Programme Manager of the 

Cooperation Fund to present the Project to the Cooperation Fund Management Board to approve and launch the Project. 

An overview of the definitions, acronyms and abbreviations used in this Project Brief can be found under Annex 1. 

1.1.2. Background: The Examiner‟s Support Tool Prototype of OHIM‟s Lab 

The Common Examiner‟s Support Tool (CESTO) is one of the projects of the Cooperation Fund. The OHIM Cooperation 

Fund (CF) was established in February 2010 to support further harmonization in TMs and designs, modernise national 

offices and enhance user-experience Europe-wide. 

The CF Management Board received many project suggestions from national offices and user associations. These were 

carefully examined and used as the basis for establishing a list of 23 projects. These projects are one-off activities 

delivering clear benefits, with concrete outputs and clear start and end dates. 

Suggestions were called under four headings or fields: 

Harmonization projects both including existing projects like TMview and new projects like Designview, a common 

examiner support tool and a common tool for the classification of goods and services; 

A suggested list of software packages (e-filing, e-opposition, e-cancellation, e-renewal and e-payment) to support 

national offices in providing easier access to trade mark and design protection; 

Information services comprising communication and training initiatives to help companies better understand the 

Community Trade Mark (CTM) and the Registered Community Design (RCD) systems; 

Activities to facilitate the enforcement of trade mark and design rights, helping the work of judges, customs and 

other relevant authorities. 

This Project falls under Field 1.2, covering the new harmonization projects. Following the 18 May 2010, the CF 

Management Board issued the following mandate to the Project Manager: 

Page 5 / 34


Common Examiner Support Tool 

Programme ID: CF1.2.10 

Expected start: 2 Q 2011 

Timeline 2011 – 2013 

Principles Best practice sharing and harmonisation of examination 

tools 

Description This project aims to develop a standardised automated 

search tool for examiners in order to improve the quality and 

consistency of decisions and reduce examination 

timescales. 

Table 1 - Project Mandate 

OHIM‟s Lab developed a prototype having a very closely related objective to that of the current project. This prototype, 

codenamed EST for “Examiner‟s Support Tool” was aimed at “defining the elements and functionalities that an automated 

„pre examination report‟ should fulfil in order to support the examiner in adopting both Absolute and Relative Grounds 

decisions”. 

The objective of this prototype was to generate a report to support the examination of the trademark file and the 

building of the decision. 

The prototype was finished in November 2008 and officially launched for testing on the 12 th February 2009. 

Although the prototype was finally not validated, it produced very interesting feedback for the purposes of the current 

project; it helps understanding the key elements for a CESTO success path: integration with the business workflow, 

ownership of the datasources and tight control on the search algorithms, together with the integration with business rules 

to adapt to the examination practices of the POs. 

For a detailed view of the “lessons learnt” derived from the prototype, check ANNEX 2 - EST « Lessons Learnt » 

1.2. The Challenge 

In the past both the OHIM and the national offices often lacked transparency and consistency in their examination 

decision making procedures. This has led to a situation where the predictability and legal certainty of examinations is not 

always guaranteed. 

The Cooperation Fund now offers an opportunity to substantially advance and improve upon OHIM‟s initial efforts, in 

partnership with other stakeholder, taking into account the lessons learnt from the OHIM prototype. Internal stakeholder 

groups of the OHIM such as TMD and LAB have been involved and invited to give suggestions and /or criticisms on a 

common similarity tool. 

National offices have also been contacted (as explained under Annex 3) and several national offices have shown different 

level of interest in this Project. Some discussions have taken place with them in order to ensure their expectations from 

this Project are covered as far as possible. 

Page 6 / 34


1.3. Objectives 

The project aims to develop a tool to deliver a standardised and automated report for examiners in order to improve 

the quality and consistency of decisions and reduce examination timescales 1 . 

Before examiners can build their opinion on the outcome of a decision, they have to carry out a series of checks and 

verifications. They have to “build” the case before deciding on whether to file objections or to accept the registration of the 

trade mark. 

The objective of the Common Examiners Support Tool is supporting the examiner in the process of adopting a decision 

regarding a trade mark examination case. This support takes the form of a “Search Report” that is prepared automatically 

before the case is presented for examination (see Annex 5 for a list of the information the report could provide). This 

search report could also have value for cases where Absolute Grounds need to be re-examined, such as in cancellation 

cases or Appeal procedures against examination decisions. 

The given project objective illustrates that the Common Tool on Similarity of Goods and Services is fully aligned 

with the 3 Cooperation Fund goals. 

CF goals Project alignment 

Modernizing and streamlining National Office systems along 

common lines to provide effective and efficient services 

Encourage harmonization and use of EU TM systems and 

practices across the EU 

Assisting the competent authorities in the EU Member States to 

better promote and enforce trademark and design rights in their 

jurisdictions. 

Table 2 - CF Goals Alignment 

Very high 

Very high 

Very high 

This alignment is also reflected under the expected benefits of this Project, enlisted under Chapter 1.4. 

1.4. Expected benefits 

The degree to which each individual Office benefits from the CESTO project will be closely related to the kind of 

examination workflow of that Office. Overall, the following should be considered: 

1. Improvement of Consistency in decision-making. Having a report and “traffic lights” available to warn the 

examiner on the existence of similar previous cases to the one being examiner will be a very strong argument in 

1 Vision as defined in the list of projects of the Cooperation Fund. 

Page 7 / 34


favour of consistency. Examiners will be easily aware of the past practice of the Office in order to produce a fully 

informed decision (whether to follow or not the past practice). 

2. Improvement in Decision-making Quality by the avoidance of “evident errors”. The report is generated 

automatically for 100% of the applications in course of examination. Therefore, in principle there is no case that could 

escape a potential warning or the identification of a similar case. This ensures that if the warnings and reports are 

correctly defined by the PO administrator, the possibility of an evident mistake is close to zero. This is important 

because such mistakes, although not frequent, usually have a big impact in the perception of the work of the Office. 

3. Harmonization. A key objective of the Cooperation Fund is the harmonization of examination practices and tools in 

the European Union. CESTO should bring a common solution based, to the maximum extent possible, on commonly 

agreed databases and resources. 

4. Improvement of examination time. For those cases where the examiner needs to carry out research before 

accepting a trade mark under Absolute Grounds, the report will bring relevant information to his/her attention, thus 

saving time. This benefit will is dependent upon the approach to examination applied by the Office. Even where “prescreening” 

is adopted, at least 15-20% of all applications will still benefit. 

For those POs where the examination of Absolute Grounds requires the consultation of several data sources, the 

potential time benefit will be applicable to all applications. The correct realization of this benefit requires that the tool 

integrates fluidly in the examination workflow of each Office. The report must be made available to the examiner at 

the right point in the procedure in order to be useful. This is a decision for each office to take. 

Page 8 / 34


2. Project Plan 

The project plan establishes the preliminary basis for managing the Project, including the project approach, the project 

team and stakeholders, the work description, the deliverables, planning (tools), time and cost estimates and tolerances, 

the project risks and dependencies as well as reporting, quality, communications and close-out management strategies. 

2.1. Project Approach 

2.1.1. Overall approach 

The project approach is to provide EU IP offices with a common tool to deliver a standardised and automated report for 

examiners in order to improve the quality and consistency of decisions and reduce examination timescales. 

This tool will have the following main functionalities: 

1. User functionalities 

The tool generates a report that contains the result of searches launched automatically on the trade mark‟s denomination 

and other relevant data. 

The automatic searches that will populate the report will be based on the following key elements of the application: 

Complete trade mark denomination. 

Name or ID of Owner / Opponent 

Name or ID of Representatives 

Nice Classes covered 

Expiry date where recorded 

The tool will include some business rules that will determine the degree of expected relevance of the result. In order not to 

interfere excessively with the work of the examiner, the tool proposes the use of webservices containing “traffic lights” 

information that the POs could integrate in a mini-desktop in their production tool(s).These traffic lights will be lit differently 

(green, yellow or red) depending on the relevance of the search results. 

The PO administrator will have the opportunity to set the rules for these lights dependent upon local policy and law. As an 

example, he/she will be able to define that any identity hit for which Nice classes coincide should lit a red traffic light, 

whereas if Nice classes do not coincide, the light should be orange. 

The tool will be able to generate traffic light services for each different datasource consulted by the tool. If the examiner 

wishes to explore the report as a result of one of these warnings, he/she will be able to do so, calling up the results either 

of an individual module or of the whole Report. 

Page 9 / 34


2. PO Business Administrator Functionalities 

Defining the Report 

The main output of the tool is the series of results that make up the Report. This report is built on the individual search 

services that the PO administrator decides to implement. 

CESTO Examiner’s Dashboard 

6ter Paris Convention Office Practice 

Geographic Indications 

Managing Business Rules 

Earlier owner filings 

Refusals Database Weak Words 

VIEW COMPLETE REPORT 

The PO administrator is the person responsible for the decision on 

which services have to form part of the report for his Office. This 

person should form part of the relevant business area and will not 

need to have an IT technical background. 

The tool will have to provide an interface for each Office to define 

its particular web interface report. 

The services provided for each particular datasource should be customizable to a certain extent, for example, regarding 

the degree of similarity for considering a hit exists. 

This customization will be dependant on the information the webservices can provide and, therefore, the customization 

possibilities will be only offered once the appropriate webservices are available. The customization areas will be the 

following: 

Customization of business rules. The service will provide, as a minimum, the ID of the mark, its denomination, the 

owner or applicant, its representative and the Nice class or classes. Consequently, the administrator will be offered a 

graphic way of building Boolean queries using this information (for an example, see figure). 

Customization of traffic lights. Different threshold of results will trigger different colour warnings. Red will indicate 

the examiner has to check the report; yellow would indicate there could be relevant results and the examiner should 

check the report. Green would indicate that, although results exist, they are likely not very relevant. 

The PO business administrator will build such sets of conditions using the available information regarding the owner, 

representative and Nice classes. They will be combined using Boolean (AND, OR, NOT) functions to determine green, 

yellow and red lights. 

Fine-tuning the tool (generation of logs) 

The PO administrator will need to be aware of the results produced by the different business conditions he/she has fixed 

when configuring the modules. 

The tool will not only save the reports generated but will also keep a log on the traffic lights lit for each report. These logs 

should be exportable in csv or Excel format in order that the PO administrator can analyze the data of the case. 

The Log would ideally contain all the searches and conditions on which the searches were launched and the full data of 

the results retrieved. 

Page 10 / 34


2.1.2. Scope and exclusions 

The tool aims at delivering services the PO may use in different ways. The tool will also include a web interface for the 

customization of these services and for the rendering of the results of the search report. 

1. The project does not intend to cover the integration effort the PO could consider regarding their IT tools. 

Consequently, all of the following are explicitly out of the scope of this project:: 

Any integration either of the report services or the software package into POs backoffice tools. 

The web interface will be made available to the POs under a “standard configuration”. Any modification of the 

configuration will be in charge of the PO. The project will not deliver personally customized web interfaces. 

Any development, modification, upload or other preparatory actions regarding particular databases that a PO 

may wish to use within the report the tool generates. The development of the appropriate webservices in order 

that these databases could be integrated with the report will fully depend on the initiative and cost of the 

Participating Offices. 

2. Because of the complexities regarding the databases for the follow up of inter parte decisions, it is initially excluded 

that the CESTO report is developed to also support adoption of Relative Grounds decisions. 

3. Analysing work processes and / or designing process maps is also excluded from the scope. CESTO will restrict itself 

to the provision of web-services. Any business or technical study necessary for the implementation of such services 

in the POs back-office will entirely depend on the initiative of that particular Office. 

2.1.3. Constraints 

The Project will be facing a number of constraints, as detailed below: 

Time restrictions: In principle there are no hard time constraints, as there are no legal obligations involved under 

the Project. 

Resources restrictions: Success of the Project has a direct dependence to the resources that are made available. 

In particular the availability of resources within the national offices will be a key to the success of this Project. 

2.2. Project team and stakeholders’ organisation 

In order to carry out these activities, intensive interaction and coordination with POs is needed to gather different ideas, 

approaches, experiences, requirements, constraints and preferences. Besides the intensive participation of POs, the 

project will also involve the participation of a project manager, the PSO and OHIM‟s team of experts and project 

managers and analysts. 

Page 11 / 34


POs 

CF 

Programme 

Steering 

Group 

2.2.1. Roles and responsibilities 

Quality 

Working 

Group 

CF 

Programme 

Manager 

OHIM Quality 

team 

Project 

Manager 

CF 

Programme 

Support Office 

CF 

Programme 

Tender 

Review 

Group 

External 

contractors 

CF 

Programme 

Risk 

Management 

Group 

Table 3 - Overview Project Team and Stakeholders 

CF Benefits 

Advisory 

Group 

CF 

Procurement 

team 

This table summarises the key roles involved in the project as well as their main responsibilities: 

Roles Responsibilities 

OHIM Project Manager (PM) 

OHIM Business Lead 

The PM is appointed by OHIM. 

The PM is authorised to lead the project on a day-to-day basis on behalf of the CF 

Management Board within the constraints laid down by the Board. 

The PM is responsible for the management of the lifecycle of the project and the 

quality of its products delivered within the specified constraints of time and cost. 

The PM plans, monitors and reports on the project to the Programme Manager. 

The PM produces project management documentation. 

The PM is responsible for presenting the project at the gate review process. 

The PM acts as a central point of communication. 

The Business Lead is appointed by OHIM. 

The Business Lead is responsible for the description of the objectives of the project 

and is in charge of gathering the business feedback from the POs, contributing to the 

draft of the project specifications. 

The Business Lead justifies the case for the project and monitors that it remains valid 

throughout the project. He/she raises the issue before the PM when some of the 

expected benefits or functionalities are at stake, updating the project documentation if 

Page 12 / 34


OHIM CF Programme Support Office 

OHIM CF Procurement team 

PO Participating Offices 

OHIM Technical Lead 

OHIM 

OHIM 

necessary. 

The Business Lead participates in the development phase producing input and 

clarifications for the development company. He / she also participates in the tests of 

any deliverable (prototypes, beta tests, final product) and validates the results of the 

testing phase. 

The PSO supports the Programme Manager and Project Managers. 

It aids those involved in the project by provision of technical and administrative 

capacity, and quality assurance. 

This team will be responsible for all the legal and administrative activities required to 

ensure that the selection of the companies that will participate in the Software 

Package development. The team will be led by an OHIM representative. 

POs will provide one central representative per NO. 

The contribution of each PO would be required: 

In the initial phase providing documentation or specific input needed for 

specification gathering phase. 

Throughout the project with their feedback, 

participation in tests 

adoption of the final product. 

The role of the technical leads is double: as project architects/deputies and as 

maintenance managers. 

Project Architect. Many of the PMs appointed for CF projects will not have 

an IT background, despite the fact that a vast majority of proposed projects 

are "IT-centric". It is therefore expected that they will request support from 

ITD in order to have access to expert knowledge in IT. It is probably also 

fair to expect that at different project phases (analysis, design, 

implementation, etc.) the PM will want to have a shadow "deputy" in order 

to handle details with the IT providers. 

Maintenance manager. Once a project rolls out an IT product, corrective 

maintenance is expected to take place. Also, adaptive maintenance is likely 

to happen. Furthermore, an aspect of knowledge "continuity" must be 

ensured in order to remain ready for the future. 

IT Architecture Board Responsible for the creation of the technical architecture/orientation document. Once 

submitted to the provider the OHIM DSS expert should provide clarifications where 

needed. 

Trade Mark Examination Key User 

Provide input regarding the needs of the business regarding the searches the tool 

can offer in the area of Absolute Grounds examination. Give advice on the solutions 

for integration of the tool in the examination workflow. Validate functional 

Page 13 / 34


OHIM 

specifications. 

TM View analyst-advisor TM View will be the most important datasource for this project. Consequently, an 

expert in the operation and technical solutions used in that project should participate 

also in the development of CESTO in order to give advice on the usage of TM View 

webservices and to easily convey eventual CESTO needs to the TM View Project 

Manager. 

OHIM SQC Coordinator 

The OHIM SQC Coordinator (“Software Quality Control”) is responsible for the 

installation in test environment and the SAT 

The OHIM SQC Coordinator creates the PRF in order to promote the software 

packages once the final UAT is OK. 

Table 4 - Roles and responsibilities within OHIM 

Apart from the main roles in the project, there will also be other parties and stakeholders involved in the project: 

Roles Responsibilities 

CF Programme 

Steering Group 

CF Programme 

Manager 

CF Programme Tender 

Review Group 

CF Programme Risk 

Management Group 

2.2.2. Assignments 

Ensuring that all internal OHIM issues are addressed by the Programme Manager. 

The Programme Manager is responsible to the CF Steering Group for the operations of the CF, 

overall planning, and leading the development and implementation of the project portfolio. 

Supporting the call for tender team, they will assure that tendering procedures across the CF are 

carried out efficiently, consistently and in accordance with best practice. 

Established to: 

recognise possible risk factors and identify related risks 

assess the potential impact of these risks for the programme 

select the adequate risk response and implement action plans 

monitor the status of the risks and keep stakeholders informed 

They will be in close contact with the Project Manager and the PSO in order to identify and register 

any new risk that could arise along the duration of the project. 

Table 5 - Roles and responsibilities within CF 

Role Names Commitment 

Project Manager Melanie Loveday 30% of her working time. 

Business Lead Jaime Cos Codina 30% of his working time. 

Programme Support Office Miguel Moro 

Carolyne Vande Vorst 

5% of their time 

Page 14 / 34


Project Team 

Role Names Commitment 

Trade Mark Examination Key User 

SQC Coordinator 

Technical Lead 

TM View analyst-advisor 

2.2.3. Recruitment 

Sofie Declercq 

Nathan Wajsman 

Simon White 

Diego Eguidazu 

Mark Kennedy 

Mark Kennedy, Service 2, 

Trade Mark Department, OHIM 

Xavier Xhenemont and/or assistant. 

To be appointed by ITD before Nov 2010 

To be appointed before Nov 2010 

Table 6 - Overview commitments per profile 

5% of their working time 

10% 

10% of the total SQC effort. 



The project will require experts from the POs in order to form the working group. The profiles required are staff from 

National Office who show an interest in this project and have knowledge of examinations proceedings and in particular in 

relation to taking decisions on absolute grounds and be proficient in English. A profile of preferred candidates can be 

found at Annex 3. 

2.3. Work description 

Under this chapter the work to be done under the Project is first broken down into high-level tasks and activities, with a 

specification of the roles involved and the estimated man days per profile. This is followed by a detailed overview of the 

deliverables of the Project, together with their acceptance criteria. 

2.3.1. Tasks and activities 

The following activities have been identified: 

Define a common set of information sources consulted by examiners in support of the examination of a given trade 

mark application or opposition. Some of these result from legal requirements (e.g. Article 6ter of the Paris 

Convention, Geographical Indications) while others result from the need to determine whether the sign applied for 

has a meaning in the market of the goods and services of the application (e.g. specialised encyclopaedias) or 

whether it is consistent with the past practice of the Office. 

Define and develop services to support a series of searches on the information sources identified. These services will 

allow each PO to adapt the results to their needs. 

Define and develop a web interface to render the results of these queries; this information will be made available to 

examiners as a pre-examination report or via a status dashboard. The dashboard will aim to warn the examiner when 

results of interest are obtained. This interface will enable consultation of the detailed report if required. This would 

allow a quick check in cases where only a cursory review of the case is necessary before accepting it. 

Page 15 / 34


Define and develop the user administration interface to enable a non IT person (the PO administrator) to build the 

pre-examination report for his/her Office and define dashboard. 

Organize a single “training for trainers” session for the Project‟s key persons in each PO (max 2 persons per Office). 

Deliver technical and user documentation for CESTO final product. 

Page 16 / 34


2.3.2. Major deliverables and acceptance criteria 

Deliverable Responsible Contributors 

List of Datasources and Business Rules 

applicable. 

Start Finish 

Business Lead POs, TMD 10/11/2010 23/02/2011 

Define High Level Specifications Business Lead POs, TMD 02/11/2010 04-03.2011 

Working Group Validation of Specifications Business Lead POs, TMD 24/02/2011 02/03/2011 

Functional Analysis Document Business Lead 

POs, External 

contractor 

07/03/2011 24/06/2011 

Review Business Case justification Business Lead POs, TMD 27/06/2011 08/07/2011 

Kick Off meeting 

Project Manager, Business 

Lead 

IAERD, ITD, TMD, POs 02/02/2011 02/02/2011 

Test Approach Document Technical Lead External contractor 15/12/2010 25/01/2011 

SQC Acceptance Criteria Technical Lead External contractor 27/06/2011 15/07/2011 

SQC Validation of Functional Analysis Technical Lead External contractor 27/06/2011 15/07/2011 

Installation of CESTO Prototype Project Manager External contractor 27/10/2011 09/11/2011 

Testing CESTO Prototype 

Summary Document on Prototype Feedback 

CESTO Testing (Iteration 1) 



Live "beta" testing 

Project Manager. Business 

lead 


lead 


lead 


lead 


lead 


lead 

POs, TMD 10/11/2011 23/11/2011 

POs, TMD 24/11/2011 07/12/2011 

POs, TMD 14/03/2012 27/03/2012 

POs, TMD 11/04/2012 24/04/2012 

POs, TMD 09/05/2012 22/05/2012 

POs, TMD 27/06/2012 10/07/2012 

Summary Document on Testing Feedback Business Lead POs, TMD 11/07/2012 17/07/2012 

CESTO Manual External contractor Business Lead, POs 06/06/2012 03/07/2012 

GO LIVE External contractor 

Training PO trainers External contractor 

Project Manager, 

Business Lead 

Project Manager, 

Business Lead 

18/07/2012 18/07/2012 

04/07/2012 31/07/2012 

CESTO Maintenance Plan External contractor IT Lead 18/07/2012 02/08/2012 

CESTO Project Lessons Learnt 

Project Manager, Business 

Lead, Technical Lead 

Signature of Project Delivery Project Manager 

Table 7 - Overview Deliverables 

POs 03/08/2012 27/08/2012 

Cooperation Fund 

Programme Manager 

Estimated Date Range 

28/08/2012 28/08/2012 

Page 17 / 34


2.4. Project planning tools 

MS-Project, MS Excel and Clarity will be used as appropriate. 

Also, when necessary and Incident Management Tool will be use in accordance with the provider selected for the 

implementation of this Project. 

For the purposes of the coordination of the Project Team, bearing in mind that different Participating Offices having seat 

though the whole territory of the European Union, a wiki will be created and other collaborative-document sharing 

solutions could also be envisaged (e.g. Google Docs, social tools, etc.). 

Page 18 / 34


2.5. Project time plan 

Page 19 / 34


Figure 1 - Project Time Plan 

Page 20 / 34


2.6. Project cost estimates 

The overall estimated cost for the CESTO project is 1,634,084 € over a period of 18 months, which includes a 

10% Management Reserve. 

See in Annex the cost overview tables per cost category. 

Based on the man days estimated in the deliverables section the following cost categories can be identified: 

IT Costs amount to 920,000 € (about 56 % of the total budget) of which 393,000 € are budgeted for to be 

used for development activities in 2011. These include Software Quality Control and Infrastructure and 

Operations Services costs. 

Set Up Costs: 315,000 € (about 20 % of the total budget) represent the Web Services integration and Set-up 

costs for the POs, based on 9 POs, or 35,000 € per office. 

POs resources for CESTO Working Group: the rate considered will be based on their specific actual cost of 

employment for the requested profiles. Since at this stage the different figures cannot be determined, an 

average estimated rate of 500 €/day has been applied. A total of 420 man days has been planned for the 

Working Group totalling 210,000 € for 5 POs or 84 days each. 

Meeting expenses: expenses have been calculated in accordance with current OHIM rules in force - Decision 

of the President ADM – 09-33 rev 2. Estimated total cost for up to 2 representatives from maximum 5 POs in 

the CESTO Working Group totals 27,020 €. 

2.7. Project tolerances 

The time and cost tolerances for the Cooperation Fund projects will be set by the Cooperation Fund Programme Support 

Office in collaboration with the Programme Steering Group as soon as the respective projects have been approved and 

will be the same for all Cooperation Fund Projects. 

2.8. Risk analysis 

At the moment of drafting this document, the following types of risks have been identified, mostly thanks to the lessons 

derived from OHIM prototype “EST”. 

2.8.1. Risk Types 

The risks identified under this Project can be divided into the following risk types or areas: 

User Interaction including speed and compatibility with existing working tools and processes 

Technical Risks including connections with internet resources, web-services and any other replacement used. 

Page 21 / 34


Nature of the trade mark sign and the containment of irrelevant results 2 . 

Implementation of Business Rules and any risks in terms of possible complications of their implementation within 

the system. 

Compatibility with the Examination Process 

Interdependencies with other projects 

Resource availability in terms of funding and staffing 

2.8.2. Risk Register 

Risk Risk Symptoms Area P I P*I Owner Action 

Resources not 

available for 

production 

TM View Data 

not available 

Procurement 

project (CF2.13) 

is delayed 

The tool does 

not fit with 

examination 

workflow 

Most of the resources 

examiners could use in the 

internet are not prepared to 

respond to systematic 

queries. 

Missing data from TM View 

will preclude the tool either 

working for some Offices or 

not providing all the 

services necessary they 

consult specialised web 

pages for information. 

As a result NOs will have to 

change way of working as 

soon as tool is available. 

The framework contract 

resulting from that project is 

not available as initially 

foreseen. 

The examination workflow 

is quite straightforward in all 

Offices and the ratio of 

acceptance is high. 

Technical H H 9 Project 

manager 

Technical M H 6 Project 

manager 

Interdepen 

dencies 

Compatibili 

ty 

L M 2 Project 

manager 

M H 6 Project 

manager 

Mitigate 

If paid resources exist, negotiate 

agreement if possible. Reduce 

the number of resources used to 

those available. 

Watch 

Closely follow up TM View 

Project in relation to 

maintenance problems. 

Watch 

Mitigate 

Ensure that search possibilities 

are comprehensive enough. 

Ensure that there is enough 

room for “fine-tuning” the results. 

Define a low impact interface. 

Page 22 / 34



Ensure that performance times 

are included in Acceptance 

Criteria. 

Resources do 

not offer webservices 

Business Rules 

impossible to 

implement 

Excessive noise 

in search results 

Report difficult 

to navigate 

External 

services 

Those resources not 

offering web-services 

require a tailored way of 

accessing and offer no 

possibility of tuning either 

the query or the result of it. 

Business rules could 

require that some queries 

are done under certain 

conditions (degree of 

similarity, excluding stop 

words, etc.) which could not 

be supported by the 

CESTO Tool. 

Trade mark signs consisting 

of several words pose 

problems when defining 

automatic queries. In some 

cases, word by word query 

is advisable. In some 

others, only a word is 

relevant. If the wrong 

strategy is chosen, the 

report will contain a lot of 

noise. 

Each trade mark will 

produce a different profile of 

results. An interface that 

does not flexibly adapt to 

the nature of the results will 

overburden the examiner 

with unwelcome 

information. 

Some of the resources the 

examiners check on the 

User 

interaction 

Implement 

ation 

Nature of 

the trade 

mark sign 

Implement 

ation 

H M 6 Project 

manager 

H M 6 Project 

Manager 

H M 6 Project 

Manager 

Mitigate 

Produce a test gateway to allow 

connection to key resources not 

providing web-services. Exclude 

resources not offering webservices 

from the operation of 

the tool. 

Mitigate 

Try to use “internal” resources 

providing web-services. 

Establish service level 

agreements with the owner of 

the date source in order to 

obtain the necessary technical 

conditions or import the 

database. 

Mitigate 

M M 4 Mitigate 

Technical M M 4 Project 

Manager 

Communicate with Search 

Project in OHIM‟s Lab to benefit 

from solutions proposed in 

similar problems. For others, 

allow an easy mechanism for 

changing search conditions and 

re-launching the query. 

Include in “Acceptance Criteria” 

and in specifications. Test cases 

in UATs 

Mitigate 

Design a tracking system that 

Page 23 / 34



disappear internet simply disappear or 

change their operation 

principles (e.g.move to 

subscription) 

Delays and 

resource 

planning 

If deadlines and gateways 

are delayed. 

Key experts If key team members / 

business or IT experts are 

not or no longer available 

2.9. Key dependencies 

Interdepen 

dencies 

Resource 

availability 

Table 8 - Project Risk Matrix 

M M 4 Project 

Manager 

M H 6 Project 

Manager 

can report on such problems 

both to the tool administrator 

and to the examiner, so that the 

tool does not look as 

“malfunctioning”. 

Watch 

Closely monitor dependencies 

Watch 

The CESTO project has dependencies with other projects scheduled in-house. These dependencies have been classified 

depending on the nature of the dependency (Synergy (S), Overlap (O) or Dependency (D)) and are summarised as 

follows: 

Project 

Project TM View 

Project “Search 

Image 

Functionality” (CF 

1.1.1.) 

Project 

“Harmonised 

Quality Standards” 

(CF 1.2.5) 

Type 

D S O 

● High 

● High 

● Low 

Impact Description 

Retrieving identical or similar trade mark denominations to the 

currently examiner one in POs different than the one of the 

examiner has a clear interest for the overall harmonization and 

consistency of decisions. If a given trade mark has been already 

accepted in some POs, this could be a convincing argument to 

adopt the same decision (although still different practices and, in 

particular, different languages could lead to a different solution). 

If these searches are to be integrated in CESTO Report, TM 

View should be capable of providing the necessary webservices. 

CESTO provides for a series of search possibilities regarding 

trade mark denominations. It is also interesting to supplement 

these searches with a search image feature. CESTO could 

benefit from this project provided that it can produce the 

corresponding webservices. 

CESTO has to define a set of datasources and search conditions 

that are related to the quality standards the Participating Offices 

need to implement. 

Page 24 / 34


Project 

Project TM-XML 

standard 

extension and 

Architecture 

Definition (CF 

2.13) 

Project “Standard 

Procurement” (CF 

2.13) 

Project 

“Backoffice for TM 

and Designs” (CF 

2.19) 

OHIM‟s IPR LAB 

“OSA” Search 

algorithm. 

Type 

D S O 

● Medium 

● High 

● Medium 

● High 

2.10. Project plan and schedule reporting procedure 

Impact Description 

The CESTO project is based in the use of webservices and the 

TM-XML standards. CESTO will have to be aware of the results 

produced by this project in order to adhere to them or to request 

clarifications to its Team. 

The development of CESTO software will fall under the 

framework development contract established under this project. 

Therefore, its development is directly dependent on the result of 

that Project. 

The CESTO Report best integration within the examination 

workflow will happen by using its webservices directly from the IT 

production tool. 

This integration with the backoffice would happen in two areas: 

1.- Desktop traffic lights integrated with the examination IT tool to 

warn the examiner he/she should check the report. 

2. Report details available via the traffic lights or directly by a 

“report screen”. 

Most of the searches to be done on trade mark denomination 

required and advanced search algorithm defined having in mind 

the particular nature of trade mark signs (weak parts, complex 

expressions, word joining, etc.). These search services are being 

developed by the OSA Project of OHIM‟s IPR Lab. A remarkable 

added valued to CESTO tool would be added if these services 

can be used. 

Table 9 - Project Dependencies 

As set out in the Programme Operating Rules agreed by all internal parties involved in the CF: 

The Project Manager will report to the PSO 

Project managers create, maintain and update the following minimal documents for their projects: 

Page 25 / 34


Project plan and schedule (including breakdown tasks, costs, time and resources). It will include 

tracking information (actual and planned) in a visual manner. 

A risk register and, if appropriate, the suggested contingency plans. 

A stakeholder engagement and communications plan 

The documents will be reported upon using a standard template (see Programme Operating Rules) 

The documents shall be kept as light as possible but the PM retains the authority to define their content and set the 

reporting schedule. Initially a meeting with the PSO will be set up on a fortnightly basis. 

Project Managers are responsible for preparing the content for a Gate Review. PSO will support them in the process. 

As well as the Project Manager-PSO interactions, the PSO will also hold independent monthly meetings with the Risk 

Group, the Tender Review Group and the PSG respectively. In each meeting the PSO will report them on the status of 

the project and will bring up any topic under their fieldwork that needs either further discussion or their validation. 

TASK/RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX 

Task Recurrence Assigned role Responsibilities 

Regular reporting 

Monthly; 

updates 

weekly via 

Clarity tool 

Project Manager 

Monthly reporting to the PSO: project plan, risk register 

and communications plan 

Gate review management Undefined Project Manager Documentation for the Gate Review process 

Reporting to Risk Group Monthly PSO Update on the latest status and issues to discuss 

Reporting to Tender Review Group Monthly PSO Update on the latest status and issues to discuss 

Reporting to Programme Steering Group Monthly Programme Manager Update on the latest status and issues to discuss 

2.11. Quality management 

Table 10 - Reporting matrix 

The quality activities of the development of the software will follow a standard approach by a specialized contractor, 

independent of the contractor employed to implement the software. The overall process is illustrated here: 

Page 26 / 34


Performance 

Testing 

Document 

Review 

QC Activities 

Security 

Testing 

Test Approach 

Code 

Review 

Regression 

Testing 

Functional 

Testing 

Figure 2 - Quality control activities 

UAT 

Support 

The basic test approach is defined at the beginning of the project and it consists of the production of a software test 

approach, where the specific scope of the software quality control activities will be defined. For the definition of this scope, 

stakeholders are consulted and ultimately, the Project Manager will receive a “Test Approach Document” specific for the 

project. 

The following activities will always be present in every project, and executed by the specialized contractor: 

Document review of the requirements in order to establish acceptance criteria before starting the implementation 

phase. 

Elaboration of a test plan and test design 

Validation of key project documents: The purpose of the document verification for an application is early detection of 

errors in documentation, in order to increase the quality of the product in the next phases of development. 

Check of continuous build and automatic deployment 

Static and Dynamic testing 

Use of incidents tracking tool 

Code review: The aim of the code review is to determine the quality of the software developed, and to compare the 

quality between different applications. 

Stress and performance analysis: The aim of performance testing is to verify that the applications going to production 

operate according to their defined response times, and are able to handle the load they are required to handle. 

Security testing: The aim of security testing is to verify that the applications going to production operate according to 

its security requirements and to any security standards set for the software. 

The following are also needed, but may be carried out by users instead of a specialized team 

UAT support: The objective of UAT support is to provide technical and functional support to acceptance testing. 

Functional testing: The aim of functional testing is to verify that the applications going to Production operate 

according to its functional requirements. 

In order to improve the transparency, the specialized software quality control provider will report findings both to the 

Project Manager and OHIM‟s Head of Quality Assurance Sector in the IT Department. 

Page 27 / 34


2.12. Communications and knowledge management 

Apart from using general e-mail official communications, collaborative tools proved to be very successful in past OHIM 

projects that called for an important coordination effort among multiple POs. 

A quick assessment on the available and most widely extended collaborative tools in the market (e.g Google Docs, wiki 

software…), gets MediaWiki among the most powerful and appropriate tools for this type of projects. MediaWiki‟s 

simplicity, web-based operation, user-friendly interface and free-of-charge approach, allows participants in different 

locations to easily exchange ideas in an organised and efficient way. 

To sum up, two different types of tools will be used during the project: 

E-mail: it will be used in initial communications during the project (e.g invitations sent to PO‟s during the 

establishment of the architecture group, asking PO‟s for resources…), in formal communications to keep all the 

PO‟s updated (even if they do not actively participate as members of the work group), and in reporting to the 

Cooperation Fund PSO. 

MediaWiki: once the project has been launched, all the participants involved in the project should, as far as 

possible, keep all the communications and documentation inside the wiki. This will help to maintain all the 

information related to the project stored in a unique and central repository and fully accessible by every participant 

in the project 

A communication plan and knowledge management plan will be developed when the project starts. 

2.13. Closing-out strategy 

As the main product of this project is expected to have a beneficial impact well into the medium term, provision - including 

appropriate funding - will need to be made within OHIM for its absorption and transfer into the business as usual 

environment. 

The cost of the maintenance of the CESTO tool as foreseen in the IT Architecture alternative finally chosen will be that 

approximately of maintaining two running servers, around 30.000€ per year. 

Once the main deliverables have been completed, all relevant payments made, and the sustainability requirements 

identified, the Project Manager will present the project‟s results to the Management Board, which will identify main 

lessons learned at the programme level, direct the Programme Manager accordingly and close out the project. 

Page 28 / 34


3. Annexes 

3.1. ANNEX 1 - Definitions, acronyms and abbreviations 

Acronym Description 

CESTO Common Examiner's Support Tool 

CF Cooperation Fund 

EU European Union 

NO National Office 

PM Project Manager 

PO Participating Offices 

PSG Programme Steering Group 

PSO CF Programme Support Office 

WG Working Group 

Table 11 - Overview of definitions, acronyms and abbreviations used in this Project Brief 

Page 29 / 34


3.2. ANNEX 2 - EST « Lessons Learnt » 

LESSONS LEARNT FROM THE IPR LAB PROTOTYPE 

“EXAMINER’S SUPPORT TOOL (EST)” 

A Key User prepared a report on the testing experience. Its conclusions revolve around the idea that it does not fit well in 

most of the current OHIM examination workflows. The main conclusions of the report are: 

The tool is well conceived and structured, retrieving thorough and complete information. 

In the current workflow in TMD, the tool would bring added value in cases where a comprehensive research 

is necessary, thus excluding those cases where the examination task is reduced to a cursory search to 

confirm the mark‟s acceptability (estimated to 85%). For these Participating Offices where the examiner‟s 

task includes checking several datasources in all cases, the tool couold bring time, consistency and 

completeness benefits. 

The tool could be also fit as a support mechanism for Legal Advisors. 

Some resources, even key resources, are not designed for the purpose of automatic queries. That is, they 

do not offer webservices. They are rather designed exclusively for human navigation; the „query‟ field is 

usually “hidden” behind several pages of navigation. Under these circumstances, the automation requires a 

lot of tailor-made effort that can be lost the moment the consulted page changes its layout even slightly. 

Having recourse to resources that are external to the organization usually implies that there is no possibility 

for customizing the conditions on which a search is run. As an evident example, if the search engine behind 

the resource is tuned to produce a result based on a certain degree of similarity, we can not request that a 

search on identity or in a more stringent degree of similarity is made. 

Running automated queries for each and all the applications the POs treat will notably stress the target 

resources. OHIM alone would be launching around 350 queries per day, 1.750 per week, around 80.000 per 

year. This means that, for all information resources that are „external‟ to the organizations, a Service Level 

Agreement should be reached to avoid the service being blocked due to an excessive number of queries 

(confused with DoS attacks). 

OHIM‟s prototype produces a remarkable amount of information (in total, it queries more than 100 

resources). The user has to navigate through different sections and sometimes the experience is a bit 

burdensome. Ideally, the interface should take the form of a mere “traffic light” or gauge indicator the 

examiner will check only when in “red area”. In order to implement this approach, a very tight control of the 

conditions of the query and a very clear definition of the business rules will be necessary. For example, in 

cases of trade marks applied for class 5, a close similarity or identity hit in the International Nonpropietary 

Names for pharmaceutical substances should trigger a “red light”. This case requires that an identity search 

can be made on this database and that any result that is not an identity hit is ignored. 

The prototype includes a module for maintaining the specifications of each of the resources used (with 

parameters such as URL, user, password, etc). The very dynamical nature of the resources queried 

recommended the development of a module for their administration. The objective of this module is to allow 

the management and contribution of new resources directly by the relevant key users (no need of 

development knowledge). 

In the current prototype the way of generating an EST Report is by calling the resources (external and 

internal) in sequential order, in other words, the time to generate an EST Report is very related to the sum of 

Page 30 / 34


all the times taken for every request to the internet. For a new version of EST, it is recommended doing the 

requests of the resources following a parallel approach and then aggregates the results. This would 

probably reduce the time to generate an EST Report to 10%. 

It has been found very advisable that a new version of EST should have an automatic process that would 

test periodically all the services in order to constantly know their availability and reliability. The process 

would report to the administrators of the tool in case some resource is not working properly. 

Page 31 / 34


3.3. ANNEX 3 - Interest shown by the Participating Offices 

Various Offices have shown different degrees of interest in the project. The table below identifies which are inclined to 

participate in the project and summarizes the feedback provided so far. 

CODE Degree of Participation Summary Interest Declared Contact person 

BG 

DE 

DK 

ES 

FI 

Cooperation Fund (CF) Field 1 is priority for this 

Office (in particular 1.1). 

Interest in this project and explicitly confirmed 

their participation in the specification of this 


Interested to participate but not a priority 


Cannot assess whether Priority - Project needs to 

be further defined to assess degree of 

involvement. 

Interested, in principle. More information on the 

project is needed. 

Provided feedback on examination workflow; examiners check 

both AG & RG. Support the idea of modularity of the services. 

Can not assess particular benefits at this stage. 

Provided feedback on examination workflow; examiners do a 

thorough examination for each file. Considers the lessons 

learnt from the prototype very relevant; avoiding them is key 

for the success of the project. Considers the benefits of the 

project focuses on Quality but not on saving examination 

time. 


thorough examination for each file. Consider the automatic 

running of the report will not bring valuable information. 

Traffic lights approach is considered too simplistic. The 

approach to examination is focused on examiner-based search 

and use of precedents. 


thorough examination for each file. Consider an automated 

series of checks useful to support the examiner and agrees on 

the value of a "traffic light" warning system. Consider that the 

project could bring both time and quality benefits to their 

examination workflow. 

FR 2nd Priority Project in CF Field 1.2 

IE 

Interested in participating in CF Field 1. No 

further precison has been made. . 

Lidia Nikolova. 

Tel: +359 2 970 14 26 

Email: lnikolova@bpo.bg 

Petra Weitzel 

Tel: +49 89 21 95 4710 

Email: petra.weitzel@dpma.de 

Katarina Mirbt 

Email : Katarina.Mirbt@dpma.de 

Maria-Victoria Viereck 

Tel: +45 4350 85 85 

Email: vie@dkpto.dk 

Tom Petersen 

Email : tpe@dkpto.dk 

Gerardo Penas García 

Tel: + 34 91-3495580 

Email: 

gerardo.penas@oepm.es 

Provided feedback on examination workflow; a screening 

system is used. Considers an automatic search system has no Tel: +358 9 6939 5845 

clear benefits as regards processing time. A "traffic light" Email: paivi.raatikainen@prh.fi 

system is considered useful. 

François-Régis Hannart 

+33 1 53 04 55 75 

 

IT Interest - Low Priority 

MT 

RO 

Highly interested but not able to 

participate/contribute yet. Interested in further 

developments and would be interested in 

considering this project at later stage. 

Interested to participate in all projects. Stated 

for this project that: ": It will be used (when 

launched) mainly by examination, opposition and 

appeals staff. We expect it to become a daily 

working tool for them. And also: we see it a a 

natural continuation as the programme 9. What 

if it could be treated as an "upgrade" to the 

system at point 9? If you accept this scenario, 

than the IT development should be "merged" 

and the business and functional analysis should 

include both points." 

 

 

SI Sixth Priority for this Office. 

Table 12 - Overview interest national offices 

Stefania Benincasa 

Tel/Fax: +39 06 4705 5615 

Email: 

stefania.benincasa@sviluppo 

economico.gov.it 

Dinescu Ovidiu 

Tel: +40 21 312 57 37 

Email: 

ovidiu.dinescu@osim.ro 

Mr. Janez Kukec 

Tel: +386 1 620 31 54 

Tel: +386 31 571 674 

Fax: +386 1 620 31 11 

Email: j.kukec@uil-sipo.si 

Page 32 / 34


3.4. ANNEX 4 - Profiles for PO Project Team Members 

Nature of the tasks Contribute to the definition of high level specifications 

Support the preparation of the Functional Analysis Document 

Validate the final version of such document. 

Liaise with other areas of their own Office‟s business, such as trade marks and 

IT. 

Participate in prototype assessment tests and contribute to the summarize the 

feedback 

Participate in User Acceptance Tests. 

Attend project meetings 

Report and communicate within the Working Group. 

Communicate and liaise with other National Offices which are not part of the 

Working Group. 

Knowledge and skills Experience in decision taking in the area of trademarks. 

Knowledge of the internal processes and workflows 

Experience in defining requirements for IT systems would be an advantage 

Table 13 - Overview PO profiles 

Page 33 / 34


3.5. ANNEX 5 - Potential Services and Indicators available via internal data resources 

Potential services to render 

Trigger 

warning Internal resource(s) Contents 

Find cases where the trade mark denomination is similar. High Similarity Trade marks Trade mark bibliographic and procedural 

Classes of G&S are similar / contained / related 

in denomination 

+ classes 

database 

information 

Find cases of the same owner. Similarity Case Law: rejected Bibliographic information on cases 

trade marks 

where the trade mark application was 

refused. Links to the original decision. 

Identify whether a word or the whole trade mark 

denomination coincides with the name of a good or a service 

Find cases where the denomination of both contested and 

opponent's trade marks are similar 

High similarity + 

the class of the 

hit is in the 

application 

Similarity in 

denomination + 

classes 

Find cases where both parties are the same. Both parties 

coincide. 

Find cases where the opponent is a party and check 

similarity of both contested and opponent's trade marks and 

classes 

Find cases where the applicant is a party and check 

similarity of both contested and opponent's trade marks and 

classes 

Find Geographic Indications that match either the whole 

denomination of the trade mark or one of its component 

words 

Find identical or very similar trade mark denominations that 

have been registered in other Member states. Classes of 

G&S are similar / contained / related 

Similarity + 

related classes 

Similarity + 


Trade marks 

database / 

classification 

database 

Oppositions 

database 

Case Law: 

Opposition 

High similarity Geographic 

Indications database 

High similarity + 


TMView database 

Table 14 - Overview potential services and indicator 

List of goods and services that can be 

considered as properly classified. 

Opposition bibliographic and procedural 

information 

Bibliographic information on cases of 

Opposition decisions. Links to the 

original decision. 

List of Geographic indications protected 

according to EU law, with indication of 

the country and area of origin, 

Centralised interface to simultaneously 

search in the Registers of several 

Participating Offices 

Page 34 / 34

ANNEX : PROJECT COSTS 

1.2.10 CESTO (18 months) 

1. OVERALL COSTS PER DEPARTMENT 

Sum of TOTAL_COST 

Row Labels Grand Total 

IAERD 714.083 

ITD 920.000 

GSD 

HRD 

Grand Total 1.634.083 

2. OVERALL COSTS PER COST CATEGORY 



Integration 315.000 

Set-up Costs 315.000 

IT Project Costs 920.000 

Development 600.000 


IT Services 320.000 

IT Consultancy 320.000 

Non-IT Project Costs 250.530 

Meetings 40.530 

Accommodation 11.250 

Allowance 8.280 

Travel 21.000 

Translation 

Working Group 210.000 

Management Reserve 148.553 

Grand Total 1.634.083

3. COSTS PER DEPARTMENT 2011 



IAERD 135.000 

ITD 393.000 

GSD 

HRD 

Grand Total 528.000 

4. COSTS PER COST CATEGORY FOR 2011 



IT Project Costs 393.000 



IT Services 193.000 

IT Consultancy 193.000 

Non-IT Project Costs 135.000 

Translation 

Working Group 135.000 

Grand Total 528.000

ANNEX : PROJECT EFFORT 

1.2.10 CESTO (18 months) 

1. OVERALL EFFORT (in MANDAYS) 

Sum of TOTAL_MANDAYS 


External Provider 1.840 

Business Analyst 264 

IOS Expert 10 

IT Developer 1.200 

SQC Provider 366 

Translator 

OHIM Staff 516 

CF Architecture Team 5 

Procurement Team 30 

Project Manager 250 

Project Team 50 

SQC Coordinator 11 

Technical Lead 150 

Trademark Key Users 20 

PSO 20 

PSO 20 

Grand Total 2.376 

2. EFFORT IN 2011 (in MANDAYS) 

Sum of TOTAL_MANDAYS 


External Provider 786 

Business Analyst 264 

IT Developer 400 

SQC Provider 122 

Translator 

OHIM Staff 309 

CF Architecture Team 5 

Procurement Team 30 

Project Manager 125 

Technical Lead 75 

Trademark Key Users 20 

PO 270 

Working Group 270 

PSO 20 

PSO 20 

Grand Total 1.385

IT architecture project planning - IP-center

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?