200 likes | 344 Views
TC1600-Quality Assurance. Bennett Celsa QAS Joseph Woitach SPE June 4, 2013. Overview. Two Parts: New Corps Wide Quality Metrics (effective FY 2012) ; TC 1600 Implementation: Quality Plan (FY 2012-2013). Corps Wide Quality Metrics.
E N D
TC1600-Quality Assurance Bennett Celsa QAS Joseph Woitach SPE June 4, 2013
Overview • Two Parts: • New Corps Wide Quality Metrics (effective FY 2012) ; • TC 1600 Implementation: Quality Plan (FY 2012-2013).
Corps Wide Quality Metrics • USPTO and Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) 2011 Initiative. • Sources: current practices, key USPTO statistics, blogs, PPAC outreach, applicant and practitioner surveys, foreign offices, past USPTO studies, non-USPTO studies, and public comments(e.g. roundtables). • new Composite Quality Metric : effective FY 2012. • http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/patentquality.jsp (main web site); http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/qual_comp_metric.pdf.
Seven Corps Wide Quality Metrics • These metrics, combine to present a balanced view of quality issues at the USPTO:
1st Four Corps-Wide Quality Metrics • First Four Metrics : • Final Disposition Compliance Rate; • In-Process Compliance Rate; • First Action on the Merits Search Review; • Complete First Action on the Merits Review; • are based upon data from reviews of specific applications; and are measured by the Office of Patent Quality Assurance (OPQA) at the USPTO.
6th/7th Metrics (Surveys) • The last two metrics (External/Internal Surveys) • External Quality Survey (applicant/practitioner experiences); and • Internal Quality Survey (examiner experiences) • are formed from surveys performed by an independent party. • supplemented by TC specific information obtained from Ombudsman program, Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership (BCP) Meetings, Art Unit meetings etc.
5th Corps Wide Metric (QIR) • The fifth metric (QIR) relies upon objective statistical data taken from the USPTO PALM (Palm Application Locating and Monitoring system) database. • The QIR averages five factors, which are based on: • Actions per Disposal • RCEs of Total Disposals • Re-openings After-final • Non-FAOM Non-final Actions • Restrictions After-first Action • Analysis of PALM data for these five factors can reveal the presence of statistical trends arising during examination where: • training is needed; and • the presence of outstanding quality procedures identified and encouraged.
Goal of QIR Initiatives • USPTO’s on-going efforts toward • compact prosecution and • pendency reduction.
QIR#2 RCE-Pilot Initiatives (Corps) • Decrease RCEs of Total Disposals: • i.After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (AFCP 2.0): authorizes non-production time for examiners to consider responses filed after a final rejection; • until September 30, 2013. • http://ptoweb.uspto.gov/patents/afcp/ • http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-05-17/pdf/2013-11870.pdf. • ii. Quick Path Information Disclosure Statement (QPIDS): eliminates the requirement for processing of a request for continued examination (RCE) with an information disclosure statement (IDS) filed after payment of the issue fee in order for the IDS to be considered by the examiner; • if the examiner determines that no item of information in the IDS necessitates reopening prosecution, the USPTO will issue a corrected notice of allowability; • until September 30, 2013. • http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/qpids.jsp
QIR#2 RCE Initiatives (USPTO/Public) • RCE Outreach Program: http://ptoweb.uspto.gov/ptointranet/index.htm • USPTO/Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) collaboration; • Purpose: • to learn more about the root causes for RCE filings and related pressure points experienced by our stakeholder community; and • enable applicants to use RCE practice when needed and avoid it when equal or better options may be available.
TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Strategy) • FY 2012 Quality Plan Strategy: addressed 5 QIR factors, based on: • Actions per Disposal; • RCEs of Total Disposals; • Re-openings After-final; • Non-FAOM Non-final Actions; and • Restrictions After-first Action • Course of Action: formed Teams (SPE’s and QAS’s): • “Communication Team”; and • “QIR Factor Teams”. • Mined QIR data for each of the above Factors to determine trends useful for developing training on enhanced efficiencies (quality) and best practices.
TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Course of Action) • TC1600 Quality Plan- Course of Action: • Communication Team: Educational: • formed first to introduce QIR factors to TC1600; • QIR Teams: Practical: • addressed the individual QIR components; • identified three main areas needing improvement: • actions/disposal (QIR 1), • disposals not RCE (QIR 2), • restrictions after first action (QIR 5): FY12 focus
TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan (Implementation) • TC 1600: FY 2012 Quality Plan: Implementation: • Communication team (4 SPE’s): TC 1600 Awareness: • May FY12: SPE introduction • QIR introduction and restriction strategy to SPE’s via management meeting; • June FY12: Examiner introduction: • SPE’s communicate QIR information and restriction strategy to examiners at Art Unit meetings.
TC 1600: FY 2012-13 Quality Plan: Implementation: Restriction (QIR #5) • Restriction Team- FY12 Focused Targeted Metric: • identified examiners with excessive numbers of such restrictions, and reviewed selected cases; • training and quality plans were formulated for examiners including emphasis on telephonic election. • % of Total Restrictions Not Made on 2nd or Subsequent Action: • Improved: 94.8% (EOY11) to 96.1%(EOY12) to 97.7% (FY13 midyr). --(This continued a positive trend that was realized following earlier compact prosecution efforts).
TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: Implementation • Established the basis for our FY 13 main focus: • QIR #1: actions/disposal and • QIR #2: RCEs of total disposals.
TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#1(actions/disposal) • QIR #1 (actions/disposal): • Examiners with above average actions/disposal were identified and information communicated to SPEs; • Workgroup Manager/Examiner informational and training sessions have been held; • % Employees Averaging <3 Actions per Disposal: • Improved from 70.6% (EOY12) to 75.4% (FY 13 midyr).
TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#2 (RCEs) • QIR #2: RCE filings • Interviews after final and during prosecution have been encouraged; • Patterns in repeated filings of RCEs are being investigated; • Examiners with a disproportionate number of disposals for RCE are being identified and docket management issues addressed. • % Disposals Not RCE: • Decreased slightly:76.8% (EOY12) to 76.5% (FY13 midyr).
TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#3 (AF Re-openings) • QIR #3: AF Re-Openings; • Art Unit Meetings: QIR awareness and Mentoring; • After-Final Consideration Pilot (AFCP) http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/afcp.jsp; • part of the USPTO’s on-going efforts towards compact prosecution and increased collaboration between examiners and stakeholders; • AFCP authorizes extra time for examiners to consider responses filed after a final rejection. • % Finals Not Reopened: • Improved: 97.5%(EOY12) to 98.2% (FY13 midyr). • ns
TC 1600: FY 2013 Quality Plan: QIR#4 (multiple non-finals) • QIR #4: Non-FAOM Non-final Actions: • Art Unit Meetings: QIR awareness and Mentoring; • Compact Prosecution Training: • Workshops: • Applicant’s Reply Workshop (FY 12); • Enhancing Efficiency in Examination (FY13) • Refresher Training. • % Total Actions: Not 2nd+ Non-Finals • Improved:97.1% (EOY12) to 97.6%(FY13 midyr).
Questions • Bennett Celsa (Quality Assurance Specialist) • Bennett.celsa@uspto.gov • (571) 272-0807 • Joseph Woitach (Supervisory Patent Examiner) • Joseph.woitach@uspto.gov • (571) 272-0739 • Technology Center 1600 USPTO