USPTO Performance and Accountability Report - U.S. Patent and ...

22
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
FIGURE 9 USPTO Data Visualization Center
– Patent’s Dashboard
the past year and remain some of the most positive
ratings the USPTO has achieved since the inception
of the survey.
FIGURE 10 Selected External Survey Findings
Other measures of patent quality include the Patent
In-Process Compliance Rate (Table 6) and the Patent
Final Disposition Compliance Rate (Table 7).
The Patent In-Process Compliance Rate provides the
percentage of Utility, Plant, Reissue, Design (UPRD)
allowances and final rejections reviewed that were
found to be compliant with applicable rules and laws
regarding final patentability determination. The Patent
Final Disposition Compliance Rate provides the per-
PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT: FISCAL YEAR 2012
centage of UPRD office actions prior to allowance or
final rejection that were found to be compliant with
applicable rules and laws. These quality measures
contribute to changing our focus from end-process
reviews to an emphasis on front-end quality.
These measures are being subsumed within the more
robust measure, the Patent Quality Composite Rate.
TABLE 6 Measure: Patent In-Process
Compliance Rate
FISCAL YEAR TARGET ACTUAL
2009 N/A 93.6%
2010 94.0% 94.9%
2011 94.6% - 95.6% 95.2%
2012 94.6% - 96.0% 95.9%
TABLE 7 Measure: Patent Final Disposition
Compliance Rate
FISCAL YEAR TARGET ACTUAL
2009 N/A 94.4%
2010 94.5% 96.3%
2011 95.6% - 96.5% 95.4%
2012 95.6% - 96.7% 96.6%
The USPTO implemented a new quality measure,
“Patent Quality Composite Rate.” The new composite
quality metric is composed of seven total factors
that take into account stakeholder comments,
including three factors drawn from the USPTO’s
previous quality measurement procedure, and four
new factors that focus upon data never before
acquired and/or employed for quality measurement
purposes. The following factors have been
modified from the previous procedure measure:
(1) the quality of the action setting forth the final
disposition of the application; (2) the quality of the
actions taken during the course of the examination;
and (3) the perceived quality of the patent process
as measured through external quality surveys of
applicants and practitioners. The newly added
factors measure: (1) the quality of the examiner’s
initial search; (2) the degree to which the first action
on the merits follows best examination practices;
(3) the degree to which global USPTO data is indicative
of compact, robust prosecution; and (4) the
degree to which patent prosecution quality is
reflected in the perceptions of the examination
corps as measured by internal quality surveys.
Table 8 exhibits our recent progress on this new