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

76
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
and account for most of the increase in total cost of
Trademark operations during the past four years.
This increase of $15.9 million was offset by other cost
increases and decreases. Contractual services
have decreased $3.5 million over the past four years,
which represents the majority of the total Trademark
cost change over the past four years, as a result of
being able to rely more on automated tools, rather
than contractors.
The Intent-to-Use cost includes costs related to
examining both the application and the additional
intent to use disclosures. The overall cost percentages
presented below are based on both direct
costs and indirect costs allocated to trademark
operations and are a function of the volume of
applications processed in each product area.
Intellectual Property Policy, Protection, and
Enforcement Worldwide
Total costs for IP Protection decreased $4.0 million, or
9.0 percent, from FY 2008 through FY 2012. The most
significant program costs for IP Protection in FY 2012
relate to personnel services, and account for
45.9 percent of the total cost for IP Protection opera-
PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT: FISCAL YEAR 2012
tions. The next largest cost associated with the policy,
protection, and enforcement of intellectual property
worldwide is contractual services, which include joint
project agreements. These costs were incurred in
line with the activities discussed on pages 37 to 44.
Statement of Budgetary Resources
During FY 2012, total budgetary resources available
for spending was 11.7 percent over the amount
available in the preceding year, with a 36.3 percent
increase over the past five fiscal years. The increase
in budgetary resources available for use is depicted
by the graph below.
Through FY 2008, the increase in available budgetary
resources was used to fund the increased cost of
additional human capital to address the backlog
of patent applications. In FY 2009, the increase in
available budgetary resources minimally covered
inflationary increases and was $200 million less
than planned. As a result, budget reductions
and cost-savings measures were implemented.
However, while fee collections were showing a
rebound at the beginning of FY 2010, the USPTO was
operating under a smaller appropriation that was
based on the FY 2009 financial picture with lower
than average fee collections. This was a result of
the slower economy and actual collections in
FY 2009. The lack of enactment of the 15 percent
increase on certain patent fees as proposed in the
FY 2011 President’s Budget resulted in a FY 2011
appropriation $241.3 million less than planned
and as requested in the FY 2011 President’s Budget.
In FY 2012, all agency fee collections were available.
The increase in available budgetary resources
were used to fund the increased cost of additional
human capital to increase examination capacity to
address the backlog of patent applications, as well
as to provide current-year funding for the reinven-