Changes

The United States Patent and Trademark Office is the organization within the United States government that examines and grants patents and trademarks. Established under the Department of Commerce on July 19, 1952Return to [https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies/patent-and-trademark-office] by 35 U.S.C. §1[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title35/html/USCODE-2013-title35-partI-chap1-sec1.htmInnovation Policy#Proposed Patent Reform| Proposed Patent Reform], the USPTO fulfills the mandate in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."[https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/United_States_of_America_1992]. Since 1790, the USPTO has issued more than 6.5 million patents[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-web-database-now-includes-all-patents-dating-1790]. The agency's main offices reside in Alexandria, Virginia, with several satellite offices around the country.

*Abusive patent litigation. *Increasing transparency and reducing weak patent infringement claims. *Clarifying patent litigation procedures and practices. *Bolstering IP centered small businesses. *Reducing referrals to random courts for the review of patent cases. *Weakening power of [[Innovation Policy#Patent Trolls| Patent Trolls]]. <section end=summary />=History=Provisions==The provisions of the Innovation Act encompass all of the areas of reform currently in consideration by Congress.

==Organization=Pleading Requirements===In efforts to diminish the Patent Troll threat by the bill sponsors, the Innovation Act heightens pleading requirements for parties filing for patent infringement. Form 18, the form previously used to submit generalized patent infringement claims, has been eliminated by the Judicial Conference in wide-sweeping amendments. This amendment was expected to be implemented December of 2015. <ref name="patentlyo18" /> The Innovation Act also proposes Form 18's elimination by the Supreme Court to reduce patent litigation, especially litigation involving Patent Trolls or Non-Practicing Entities.<ref name="nationallawreview" /> The Supreme Court would be allowed to codify a new model for filing infringement complaints that would include notifying the accused parties of the claim and its content. <ref name ="govtracksummary" />

Supporters hope that the act would go further in reducing generalized complaints and eliminating loopholes by requiring (with exceptions) the plaintiff to submit infringement charts with the initial complaint.<ref name="patentlyoIA" /> The purpose of the charts is to force the plaintiff to explain the specifics of a claim, how a product or the specific use of the patented idea or process violates each infringed component of a patent and the scope of each component's infringement. <ref name==Administration==="patentlyoIA" />

*'''Director and Under Secretary Additionally, a claim of Commerce for Intellectual Property''': Michelle K. Lee[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/executive-biographies/michelle-k-lee]:Michelle Lee was nominated by President Barack Obama previous commercial use may not result in a court invalidating a patent because it lacks novelty, seems to serve as the Director of the USPTO on November 11cover obvious subject matter, 2014[https://www.congress.gov/nomination/113th-congress/2103] and officially took the oath of office on March 12, 2015[http://dcinno.streetwise.co/2015/03/13/new-us-patent-chief-sworn-in-at-sxsw/]. She is the first female or due to hold the office.[http://www.usptoprior art.gov/about-us/executive-biographies/michelle-k-lee]. Her first role within the USPTO was serving as the Director of the USPTO Silicon Valley regional office.[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates<ref name="govtracksummary" /us-secretary-commerce-penny-pritzker-names-michelle-k-lee-next-deputy-director]. > Prior Art refers to joining evidence indicating that the USPTOtechnology or invention in question has already been used, Lee served as the Deputy General Counsel for Google[https://wwwdiscovered, or is generally known.commerce.gov<ref name="EPO" /news/blog/2015/03/spotlight-commerce-michelle-k-lee-under-secretary-commerce-intellectual-property].*'''Deputy Director''': Russell Slifer*'''Chief of Staff''': (Vacant)*'''Commissioner for Patents''': Drew Hirshfeld*'''Commissioner for Trademarks''': Mary Boney Denison*'''Chief Policy Officer and Director for International Affairs''': Shira Perlmutter*'''Chief Administrative Officer''': Frederick Steckler*'''Chief Communication Officer''': (Vacant)*'''Chief Financial Officer''': Anthony P. Scardino*'''Chief Information Officer''': John Owens II*'''General Counsel''': Sarah Harris*'''Acting Deputy General Counsel for Intellectual Property Law and Solicitor''': Thomas Krause*'''Director of the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity and Diversity''': Bismark Myrick>

===EmploymentFees and Other Expenses===

The USPTO released its 2015-2018 People Plan, which outlines three pillars of focus act requires courts to have losing parties provide for its workforce through the 2018 fiscal year.[http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTO%202015%20-%202018%20People%20Plan"reasonable fees and other expenses" incurred in litigation.pdf] The Office intends award may be waived only if the losing party is found to use have just legal and factual cause to be part of the litigation. If the three pillars of ''lead'', ''engage''losing party is unable to pay due to extraordinary circumstances, and ''enable'' for its strategic human capital planning, which is "the process by which an organization takes stock of how its people and people-management activities align with and support court may ask a joined or interested party to cover the agency’s strategic goalsaward.<ref name=" Some human capital planning recommendations include diversifying and developing its workforceinnovationacttext" /> Additionally, connecting its employees with the core vision of plaintiff may have to pay attorney fees if it dismisses the claim before going to trial unless they were given the USPTO, and maximizing its internal leadership capabilitiesexplicit right to settle without a court order.<ref name="govtracksummary" />

At the end ===Joinder of FY 2015, the USPTO employed 12,667 individuals, which includes 9,161 patent examiners and 456 trademark examining attorneys.[http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY15PAR.pdf]. This number is up from 12,450 total federal employees in FY 2014[http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2014PAR.pdf] and 11,773 employees in FY 2013[http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2013PAR.pdf]. The USPTO is expected to employ around 13,500 employees for FY 2016.[http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fy16pbr.pdf]Interested Parties===

{| class="wikitable" border=0|+ align="center" sizeDiscovery Stay="14px"|'''USPTO Employment'''|-| scope="col" align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Fiscal Year'''| scope="col" align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Total Employees'''| scope="col" align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Patent Examiners'''| scope="col" align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Trademark Examining Attorneys'''|-| align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"| 2016 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|~13,500 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|??? || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|???|-| align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"| 2015 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|12,667 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|9,161 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|465|-| align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"| 2014 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|12,450 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|8,611 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|429|-| align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"| 2013 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|11,173 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|8,051 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|409|-| align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"| 2012 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|11,531 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|7,935 || align="center" style="background:#f9f9f9;"|386|}

The act establishes that a claim construction ruling must occur prior to discovery. <ref name="patentlyoIA" /> Discovery is a process that occurs pre-trial in a civil action, a conflict between two private parties, and is defined by the federal government as any party's right to obtain relevant information for the trial. Claim construction defines exactly what a patent includes and the extent to which a patent holder can protect the subject matter. <ref name="claimconstruction" /> The act also specifies that claim construction previously agreed upon in another court must hold when a patent claim is reviewed by the USPTO or in a new trial. <ref name=Regional Offices==="patentlyoIA" />

The USPTO currently holds four regional offices in addition to its headquarters in Alexandria, VA. In 2010, the office piloted its first regional office in Detroit, MI through the Nationwide Workforce Program.[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-open-first-ever-satellite-office-detroit] The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act provided for the USPTO to Discovery of additional or non "core"establish 3 or more satellite offices in documents is not allowed unless the United States to carry out party requesting them covers the responsibilities costs of the Officediscovery and all parties consent to discovery.<ref name="patentlyoIA"[http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/aia_implementation/bills-112hr1249eh.pdf] Subsequently> By enabling courts to limit discovery, the USPTO decided sponsors hope to expand reduce litigation costs and target patent trolls intending to all time zones through offices settle a case quickly using information revealed in Denver, CO, Silicon Valley, CA, and Dallas, TXdiscovery.[http:<ref name="innovationactsummary" //www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/us-commerce-department-open-four-regional-us-patent-offices-will-speed-patent]>

*(1) increase outreach activities to better connect To protect small businesses, the act requires that the patent filers owner explain the reason for the lawsuit and innovators with how the Office;*(2) enhance infringement has occurred to the accused party or parties. <ref name="innovationactprovisions" /> A demand letter sent prior to the lawsuit cannot be used as evidence of willful infringement unless the demand letter specifies which patent examiner retention;*(3) improve recruitment of is being infringed, what is infringing the patent examiners;*(4) decrease , the parent company that owns the number of patent applications waiting for examination; , and*(5) improve how one or more claims in the quality of patent examinationare being violated. <ref name="patentlyoIA" /> Anyone found violating these requirements would be forced to pay additional damages.<ref name= "sectionsummary" />

=====Alexandria, VA==Venue===

In 2006, the USPTO offices were consolidated The act requires that patent infringement suits only be heard in a new campus encompassing ten buildings all connected by underground walkways.[http://www.buildings.com/article-details/articleid/3374/title/uspto-makes-its-mark-judicial districts with-consolidation.aspx] The location includes 70,000-square-foot mission-critical data center and reasonable connection to the National Inventors Hall of Fame and Museum, which re-opened on May 21, 2014.[http://wwwconflict.uspto.gov/about-us/uspto-locations/alexandria-va<ref name="sectionsummary" /national-inventors-hall-fame-and-museum]>

A judicial district in which the following have occurred is considered to have reasonable connection to the dispute: <ref name=====Detroit, MI====="govtracksummary" />* the defendant is headquartered or incorporated. * the defendant infringed the patent. * the defendant's facility where the patent continues to be infringed. * the defendant was informed and agreed to the suit.* an inventor of the patent led R&D. * either party runs R&D for the patented invention. * either party manufactures a physical product that violates the patent's claims. * either party runs a process using the patented invention.

The Elijah J. McCoy United States Patent and Trademark Office[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/uspto-locations/detroit-michigan], serves as the first regional office ===Disclosure of the USPTO. Originally created under the National Workforce Program in 2012, the office provides services including but not limited to complete patent databases, collaborative workstations, regularly scheduled workshops, and public tours. Christal Sheppard serves as the current director of the regional office.[http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/uspto-locations/detroit-mi/christal-sheppard] The regional office serves the states of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin.Ownership===

An initial complaint must disclose specifics about the patent including the parent company of the patent and any party with a financial interest in the patent. <ref name=====Denver"sectionsummary" /> Any change in patent ownership must be provided to the UPSTO. If the information is not provided or updated when changes occur, CO====then the court will make the patentee cover the defendant's attorney fees. <ref name="patentlyoIA" />

The Rocky Mountain Regional OfficeWithin the Innovation Act, located in several reforms are suggested to the Byron GLeahy-Smith America Invents Act. Rogers Federal Building in downtown Denver, has been open since June 30, 2014One of these reforms concerns codifying double patenting.[http:<ref name="govtracksummary" //www> Double patenting is when two patents are awarded for the same invention to one patent holder.uspto.gov/aboutThe first-us/usptoto-locationsfile (FTF) system was introduced in the American Invents Act and put into effect in March of 2013. In the FTF system, the first inventor to file for a patent has priority in protecting the idea. <ref name="entrepreneur" /rocky-mountain-regional-office-colorado] > The office serves Innovation Act applies the FTF system to double patenting restrictions. If a patent claim is filed on the states of Idahosame day or before a similar second patent, Utah, Montanathen the first patent will be deemed prior art to the second patent. Thus, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansasdouble patenting would be prevented unless nonobvious subject matter can be proven.<ref name="govtracksummary" />

=====Silicon Valley, CA==Manufacturers===

To protect manufacturing investments and patent owners, the act prohibits foreign courts from eliminating a company's US IP licenses in bankruptcy, in accordance with US law. <ref name=====Dallas"sectionsummary" /> On the other hand, TX===the act pushes for plaintiffs to deal with manufacturers instead of the retailers or end users that have purchased the manufacturer's products. <ref name="patentlyoIA" /> Courts may stay customer suits while litigation with manufacturers accused of infringing the same patent is ongoing. <ref name="govtracksummary" />

===BudgetSmall Businesses===

In addition to reducing costs and curbing patent troll abuses, the act requires the USPTO to create and distribute educational materials for small businesses involved in aggressive patent litigation. Working outreach programs would be modified to include information on patent litigation practices that are threatening the success of small businesses. This information would also be disseminated through the Small Business Administration and the Minority Business Development Agency. The act directs the USPTO to have public records online about when a patent claim is brought to court along with other specifics regarding the patent's ownership to increase transparency. <ref name==Patent Database=="govtracksummary" />

===[[2015 Patent Data]]=References==

Classification Numbers can be found <ref name="GovTrack"> [https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr9#] 'H.R.9:Innovation Act', ''govtrack.us''. </ref><ref name="innovationactsummary"> [https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/782015_InnovationAct3.pdf] 'The Innovation Act', ''Judiciary Committee: Chairman Bob Goodlatte'', (Washington, D.C.). </ref><ref name="patentlyo18"> [http://patentlyo.com/patent/2016/04/elimination-pleading-infringement.html] L. Morad and A.J. Bramhall, 'An Early Review of the Impact of Form 18's Elimination on Pleading Direct Infringement',''PatentlyO''.</ref><ref name="nationallawreview">[http://www.natlawreview.com/article/supreme-court-adopts-amendments-to-federal-rules-may-deter-patent-infringement] Jura Zibas and Gregory Brescia, 'Supreme Court Adopts Amendments to Federal Rules', ''The National Law Review'', (Western Springs, IL). </ref><ref name="patentlyoIA"> [http://patentlyo.com/patent/2015/02/patent-reform-innovation.html] Dennis Crouch, 'Patent Reform: Innovation Act of 2015', ''PatentlyO''. </ref><ref name="innovationactprovisions"> [https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/for-packet-plain-english.pdf] 'The Innovation Act: Key Provisions', ''Judiciary Committee: Chairman Bob Goodlatte'', (Washington, D.C.). </ref><ref name="NYU"> [http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1245&context=nyu_lewp] Theodore Eisenberg and Geoffrey P. Miller, 'The English vs. the American Rule on Attorneys Fees', ''New York University Law and Economics Working Papers''. </ref><ref name="innovationacttext"> [https://www.usptocongress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/9] 'Summary: H.R.9-114th Congress', congress.gov. </ref><ref name="EPO"> [https://webwww.epo.org/patentslearning-events/classificationmaterials/selectnumwithtitleinventors-handbook/novelty/prior-art.htm herehtml]'What is prior art?', "European Patent Office: Inventors' Handbook", (Munich, Germany).</ref><ref name="govtracksummary"> [https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr9/summary] 'Summaries for the Innovation Act', "govtrack.us". </ref><ref name="interestsofjustice"> [https://www.wilmerhale.com/uploadedFiles/WilmerHale_Shared_Content/Files/PDFs/how-PTAB-applies-interests-of-justice-discovery-standard.pdf] 'How PTAB Applies 'Interests of Justice' Discovery Standard', "Law360", Portfolio Media, Inc. (New York, New York). </ref><ref name="claimconstruction"> [http://patentlyo.com/patent/2009/09/claim-construction-a-structured-framework-1.html] Peter S. Menell, Matthew Powers, and Steven Carlson, 'Claim Construction: A Structured Framework', "PatentlyO". </ref><ref name="sectionsummary" > [https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/072015-Section-by-Section-of-HR-9-Innovation-Act.pdf] 'H.R.9, The "Innovation Act": Section-by-Section Summary", 'Judiciary Committee', (July 2015). </ref><ref name="entrepreneur"> [https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/231884] Kirby Drake,'How to Take Advantage of the First-to-File Patent System', Entrepreneur Media, Inc. </ref>

USPTO's new visual database, PatentsView, can be found [http://www.patentsview.org/web/ here]. Google's helpful article on downloading USPTO PAIR (Patent Application Information Retrieval) data can be found [httpsCategory://www.google.com/googlebooks/uspto-patents-pair.html#AvailableApplications herePublic]. ===Patent Types=== [http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/h_counts.htm] ====Utility Patent==== Utility patents protect a "machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof"[http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/glossary] ====Design Patent==== Design patents protect a "new, original, and ornamental design for an article of manufacture"[http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/glossary] ====Plant Patent==== Plant patents protect a "distinct and new variety of plant that can be asexually reproduced"[http://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/glossary] ==Funding== The USPTO receives its operating funds through application fees, officially designated as "offsetting collections" to be placed in the Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Account. However, the office must publish annal reports to Congress on its expected level of revenue and expenditure. From there, Congress appropriates a certain level of funding that the USPTO may keep form its fee collection in order to run the office. Essentially, the USPTO must request permission to keep and use the money it receives from the application fees. No additional appropriation through Congress is usually approved. The net appropriation for the past three years has been $0. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) created a reserve fund for the USPTO, where all excess fees are to be deposited. Further, the AIA granted the USPTO authority "to set or adjust by rule any fee established or charged by the Office". This provision increased the office's flexibility on fee setting and helped pave the way for a new class of fees for "micro entities."[httpPublic Classification://www.uspto.gov/custom-page/inventors-eye-advice] For FY 2016, the office requested $3.2 billion of allowed expenditure from its fee collections, which with funds from other income and the Operating reserve balance, is expected to fund the necessary operating budget of $3.5 billion.[http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fy16pbr.pdf] ===Reserve Fund=== Section 22 of the America Invents Act (AIA) created a Patent and Trademark Fee Reserve Fund, where excess fees collected by the USPTO are to be deposited.[http://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/america-invents-act-aia/fees-and-budgetary-issues] The reserve fund is meant to reduce uncertainty in financial stability for the office, especially during government shutdown. The reserve should be able to sustain the operations of the USPTO for three months of its patent operations and four-to-six months of its trademark operations. The office projects the reserve fund to hold $1.9 billion through FY 2019, which will allow the office "to propose reducing trademark fees in FY 2015."[http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_sustainable_funding] However, the USPTO must still petition Congress annually for permission to spend the money deposited in the reserve fund.  ===Proposed Legislation=== *'''[[Innovation Protection Act| ]]''' *'''[[Patent Fee Integrity Act]]''' ==Fee Diversion== The USPTO's funding process through congressional appropriations left the Office subject to "fee diversions," a process of taking excess funds accumulated by the USPTO but not requested in the annual budget and appropriating them to the general Treasury fund. All fees collected by the USPTO must be credited to the Patent and Trademark Office Appropriations Account, from which the USPTO may take money that has been appropriated by Congress and see all excess funds appropriated elsewhere. This practice of fee diversion helped other sectors of the federal government cover additional expenses without exceeding appropriation limits. The USPTO reacted to this practice by closely estimating expected revenue and matching this estimate with its annual appropriations proposal for Congress. The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1990[http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-104/pdf/STATUTE-104-Pg1388.pdf] established the USPTO as a fully fee funded organization. The passage of this act, designed to cut the budget deficit, meant that Congress would not appropriate additional sources of funding for the USPTO. Instead, the office would have to remain afloat through only the fees it collects through processing patent and trademark applications. During the eight years of OBRA, an estimated $234 million in fee payments were collected by the USPTO in excess of the budget authority for the office.[https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20906.pdf] The excess funds were not placed in a reserve fund, and instead were appropriated to non-USPTO related activities. A Congressional Research Service report has estimated $1.009 billion diverted or made unavailable to the USPTO from FY1990 to FY2011.[https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20906.pdf] The Leahy-Smith Act America Invents Act created a USPTO reserve fund to hold excess fees collected in a given fiscal year. Although the reserve fund balance may only be appropriated to USPTO activities, the director of the USPTO must still petition Congress to use these funds in its annual budget request. ==Criticism==   ==Contact Information== ===Office Locations=== *'''Alexandria, VA''':  :USPTO Madison Building:600 Dulany Street:Alexandria , VA 22314 *'''Detroit, MI''': :Midwest Regional Office - USPTO:300 River Place South:Suite 2900:Detroit, MI 48207 *'''Denver, CO''': :Rocky Mountain Regional Office (USPTO):1961 Stout Street:Denver, CO 80294 *'''Silicon Valley, CA''': :Silicon Valley USPTO:26 S. Fourth Street:San Jose, CA 95113 *'''Dallas, TX''': :Texas Regional Office (USPTO):207 South Houston St.:Dallas, TX 75202   ===Online Locations=== *[http://www.uspto.gov/ Website]*[https://www.facebook.com/uspto.gov Facebook]*[https://twitter.com/uspto Twitter]*[https://www.youtube.com/user/USPTOvideo YouTube]