Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Electronic Filing System. http://estta.uspto.gov
`ESTTA315979
`ESTTA Tracking number:
`11/10/2009
`
`Filing date:
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`91189827
`Plaintiff
`Missing Cougar Company
`Missing Cougar Company
`6212 North 12th Rd.
`Arlington, VA 22205
`UNITED STATES
`missingcougarco@yahoo.com
`Opposition/Response to Motion
`Stephen Ruwe, President MCC
`missingcougarco@yahoo.com
`/Stephen Ruwe, President MCC/
`11/10/2009
`Part 5.pdf ( 58 pages )(1785595 bytes )
`
`Proceeding
`Party
`
`Correspondence
`Address
`
`Submission
`Filer's Name
`Filer's e-mail
`Signature
`Date
`Attachments
`
`

`
`Part — D
`
`Part - I)
`
`

`
`E,XI{IBIT 16
`EXHIBIT 16
`
`

`
`Trademark Performance for the year 2006
`
`Page 1
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`World in lntellectual Property Protection and Policy
`Leading
`
`Trademark Performance for
`
`year 2006
`
`Trademark Performance
`
`T he Trademark organization
`unprecedented
`results by exceeding all of its quality, timeliness, e-
`government, production, and
`targets for the fiscal
`The level of accomplishment for FY 2006 iurther improved upon
`the success achieved
`all but one performance measure was met.
`FY 2005
`progress was
`by'
`process improvements that are the result of many years of
`capitalizing
`in people and
`howwork
`has
`is performed and
`Performance results further reflect
`of
`to
`results that
`level of funding necessary
`are
`with
`support
`with increases
`for
`
`and
`
`USPTO
`to applicants.
`
`thanks Trademark employees for
`
`trademark service goals through
`
`exceptional
`
`The
`to demonstrate progress towards
`its egovernment objectives which rely on electronic
`communications
`incentives to offer markelbased services and improve the availability and participation in the U.S.
`by providing access to information
`trademark
`more effectively
`an increasingly
`global client-base. Electronic
`access
`the opportunity
`for federal
`which provides protection to
`owners and consumers by
`providing notice of marks
`use. Electronic filing and
`systems serve customers
`two very important ways: by
`improving the
`accessibility of information and by improving
`quality of the initial application and therefore ihe quality of
`the data that
`in the publication and registraiion of
`and
`
`The USPTO continues
`electronic tools to make the
`registration process fully
`to the public.
`Anyone with lnternet access anywhere in the world
`review documents in ihe officiai
`application file,
`all
`decisions made by trademark examining attorneys and
`reasons
`making them
`the Tiademark Document Retrieval
`sysigm. The
`contents of the pending inventory of
`are available electronically
`percent of
`as
`registered
`in use.
`
`the practice of creating
`The
`maintaining paper file copies
`applications
`now relies
`exclusively
`data submitted or captured electronically to
`trademark examination, publication of documents, and
`granting of
`An
`of
`oi the process was initiated io
`and
`opportunities
`process_ and cycle time
`by examining changes that have been made in the process with
`elimination of paper
`processing. A number of improvements has
`made and will continue to
`in i-row internal operations are
`will
`improve
`the process, provide better
`efficiency
`controls for tracking the status
`correspondence, and
`identify the progress of work performed and
`These
`in practice are
`of the ongoing progress that
`has been made in creating
`using
`records to process and examine applicationi flled for the registration of a
`trademark..A complete electronic records database covering all trademark pending applications, including origoing
`correspondence has been created by capturing
`and image of all new applicaiions as
`are file-cl. Th-e daltabase supports
`paperless examination as
`accessible to the public.' '
`source
`application records used
`Office as
`as
`
`that
`
`Electronic systems
`to
`the number
`type
`be completed. Significant
`process changes and
`have been
`that provide the capability to
`all examinei actions and
`dockets in
`electronic environment as well as manage the assignment of
`applicitions. Changes were made in the
`p9:t year to
`the pending paper file docket based on process changes that have
`the need for manual processing
`of
`for transactions that are
`to
`the core
`function. Additional
`which were the result of an
`internal assessment of the process, were made
`streamline post publication operations, reducinj cycle time_ Together, these
`changes have improved workflow efficiency that has led to significant gains in
`pendency-anO drastically rlducing the
`paper files that
`number
`identified as lost or requests to
`an
`due to offic-e error.
`
`that
`
`Electronic communications make it possible to conduct a preliminary search prior to
`an
`determine the status of
`pending and
`trademarks, respond to office actions, access general informatioi, examination manuals, treaties, laws and
`regulations, obtain
`information on marklpublished, registered and renewed, file initial
`and
`a
`registered mark through the USPTo website. The USPTO publishes a weekly on-iine Trademiir omciat Cazette that contains
`information covering several thousand marks
`other office actions. The weekly publication is fully
`text and
`that contain the layout are
`from electronic records and
`to the Government Printing Oifice for printing registrati6n
`certificates' The weekly Trademark Official Gazette,
`Certificates, and Updated Registration Certificates for
`five
`most
`weekly issues
`available electronically from the USPTO website. The entire pub-lication, including
`
`http : //rvww. uspto. gov/incl udes/i/navl'abRi ght2.j
`
`lll9/2009 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Tradernark Pcrlormance for the vcar 2006
`
`Page 2
`
`certificates, is available as a PDF file that can be downloaded via the lnternet for
`access to trademark information.
`
`providing expanded as
`
`timely
`
`The
`continues
`communications. ln
`including more
`trademark applications
`percent over FY 2005
`
`support improvements in
`filing
`in greater use
`years since trademark electronic filing
`became available, more than
`classes, have been filed
`the registration of a trademark.
`93.8 percent of all
`the
`Trademark Electronic
`System (TEAS), an increase
`
`filing and
`
`six
`
`past
`Over
`the
`has continued
`the public and worked
`the overall transformation
`Trademark organization as
`TEAS forms
`are available with new features added in
`past year that
`the
`and
`Applicants may
`filed responses
`now submit PDF
`that was requested by the user
`office actions,
`community. Applicants
`the ldentification Manual when
`the basic application form.
`availability and
`the
`of
`trademark related information
`the lnternet has
`our ability to provide timely, useful
`information. lt has
`demand
`and
`more complete filings
`while improving the
`process.
`efficiency
`
`enhance
`available
`egovernment operation.
`of
`
`Madrid
`
`The process of registering
`in one
`of
`countries has been greatly improved since the United
`a member
`States
`the Madrid
`on November 2, 2003.
`business owne-rs are now able to
`a
`the USPTO
`application
`English, pay in U.S. dollars, and potentially have their
`protected in any or all of
`countries
`the Protocol. Non-U.S. trademark owners of member countries may
`that are
`of protection of
`seek
`their
`registration in the
`by filing
`the lnternational Bureau of WIPO. The USpTO received 3,131
`international
`of protection or subsequent
`and
`containing
`from the lnternational Bureau
`the Protocol in FY 2006.
`
`Trilateral
`
`Representatives from the USPTO, the Offiee for Harmonization in the lnternal Market (OH|M), the European
`and the JPO,
`on the harmonization of
`their
`project. The
`and
`of
`ldentification and
`Manual
`is
`make the trademark application and
`process easier
`agreeing
`on the acceptability
`of goods and
`certain
`for
`in all three offices. The
`ldentificatio; Man-ual
`is updated to
`identifications for goods and
`that
`been accepted as
`result of
`through this project.
`
`Office,
`
`The USPTo implemented a
`to enable representatives from USPTO, OHIM,
`JpO, to add to,
`from,
`modify the
`of goods and
`in preparation for the
`the Nice Agreement - an international
`edition
`agreement
`classification of goods and services.
`
`Quality
`
`The
`organization
`to
`quality as reflected by the
`in
`in the first and
`office action deficiency rate.. Th_e criteria for
`quality expand$ on the issues that are considered for
`quality
`of "in-process" first and
`as "excellent" and "deficient" to better
`rigorous siandards oi
`meaningful
`quality. The
`quality review
`evaluated from
`been
`and betteriocus traiiing to
`to
`overall quality and to
`consistency of
`Nine new training modules
`seven exam guides were prepared to
`the reoccurring problems that were determined based
`address some
`analyses of
`reviews. Examiiers are
`to take
`a series
`tutorials, as part of the USPTO's commitment to
`the quality of examination and ensure
`all
`examiners possess the knowledge and
`necessary to perform their jobs.
`
`Customer Gall
`
`The
`operates a modern call
`system with caller
`management technology to enhance
`effectiveness in
`handling
`responding to
`The
`is a state-of-the-art web-tased information sysiem
`enables
`to
`manage caller data,
`problems, fulfill information requests,
`e-mails, and provide consistent
`Data is used to
`identifytrends, track problem resolution, conduct root cause
`to prevent and eliminate the reoccurrence of
`and
`problems.
`
`http://u.wrv.uspto.gov/about/slratplan/at/2006/3020200*trademrkpert'.jsp
`
`11/9/2009 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Tradernark Pcrlbrmance for drc rrcar 200{->
`
`Page 3
`
`USPTO senior
`WorKorce and Agency
`
`for telework, Danette Campbell, testifies before the House
`called, "Telecommuting: A 21st
`at a
`
`Reform Subcommittee on Federal
`Solution to TrafficJims and Tourism.',
`
`Telecommuting
`
`The
`continues to gain recognition as a leader in the
`government for
`successful telecommuting program. The
`Trademark telecommuting program was
`so that
`could perform the same work
`access
`same
`systems
`home
`they
`Office. Examiners work
`for a majority of the
`using
`automated
`reservation system to assign
`on
`program met
`as-needed basis.
`to greatly reduce
`space
`requirements and costs.
`program was expanded to
`in the palt
`85 percent of
`220
`eligible
`the program. The program continues to be expanded to
`now take advantage
`employees
`throughout the
`organization. All eligible
`including
`were
`least Lne day per
`week.
`
`from home
`
`The USPTO's Trademark work€t-home program received the
`Program
`Maximum Impact
`Government Award in
`2006
`its extremely
`telecommuting program by the Telework Exchange. The program was
`as an
`-performance
`innovative Telerro$ prototype for how to
`measurable performance goals in eviluating ihe
`of its
`teleworkers. The
`hoteling program is
`a "best practice" due to its succesJin addressing budgetary, space,
`retention, recruitment, and job satisfaction issues that face all government agencies and
`to populari-ty or tne piogiam.
`
`Filings
`
`New application filings
`trademark
`trademark applications, including
`
`increased by nine percent in the past
`classes for registration in Fy 2006.
`
`The USpTo received 27s,7gO
`
`Office
`
`Total office disposals were 256,002 including 315,783 classes,
`percent above plan and
`percent above Fy 2005.
`percent above FY 2005 with 147, j 1B marks registered, including
`Registrations were 16.6 percent above plan and
`than
`188,899 classes.
`
`Pending lnventory
`
`Total trademark applications pending in the USPTo decreased by nearly flve percent in Fy 2006 to 474,241 with 634,087
`classes. Twenty-six percent of the pending file
`a post Noiice of
`is
`status awaiting the
`of a
`use. The
`of
`applications (prior to first office action) at the end of
`year was gg,-AgO, conlaining 123,986
`classes; the
`of
`files decreased 29 percent from the prior fiscal year with a
`27.6 perc6nt in ihe
`number of
`consistent with the increase in
`disposals and
`in pendency.
`
`of
`
`Trademark Quality
`
`pERFORMANCE GOAL: lmprove the quality of trademark products and se/vices and optimize
`processing time
`
`The Trademark organization will
`to work
`the
`progress. This includes the implementation of
`depth reviews
`work
`making in evaluating examiner first and
`office actions. The
`of the management of its
`imnrove efficiency and
`the USPTO's success and progress in
`been established to
`
`of quality assurance programs to
`more-in-
`reviews
`consider all elements of
`organization continues to
`towards full automation
`processing times.
`performance measures have
`theie performance goal5.'
`
`The Trademark organization implemented two
`measures for assessing examination quality in
`evaluation for
`issues
`be considered deficient in making a firsf and
`action
`conducted on a
`of applications to review the qualityof decision making
`action
`2,415
`percent of
`reviewed with
`files having at
`2,508
`reviewed with
`one
`for a final acti-on deficiency rale
`
`include an
`refusal. Evaluations are
`examiner's first office action and
`substantive first action refusal.
`percent.
`
`MEASURE:
`
`Finat Action Deficiency Rate
`
`FINAL ACTION DEFICIENCY RATE
`
`,i1 LJ' : , ::l.lff F$13 r,ir,rrr f{r$SS
`
`tsi
`
`#4,
`
`U g
`
`al
`
`Target
`
`?fl.4,tt,", 1.,,F$&S
`, r,,FY
`il lA*tusl
`i
`
`P (/about/skatplan/Ari2008desS trd fi naldefi c.isp)
`
`DATA VALIDATION AND VERIFICATION
`
`Data source: Office of Trademark euality Review Report.
`
`http://wr.r'w uspto.gov/about/stratplanlar/2006/302O200_trademrkperfjsp
`
`1l/9/2009 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Trademark Pcrlbrmance for thc year 2006
`
`Page 4
`
`Frequency: Daily input, monthly reporting.
`
`Data storage: Automated systems, reports.
`
`Verification: Manual reports
`
`analysis.
`
`Data Limitations: None.
`
`Target and Actual Final Action Deficiency Rates
`lssued for the Last 4 Fiscal years
`for
`
`FY
`
`Targel
`
`Actual
`
`FY 2004
`
`5.0%
`
`58%
`
`FY 2005
`
`50%
`
`5.9%
`
`FY 2006
`
`65%
`
`3.6% met
`
`Discussion.-
`exceeded.
`organization estabtished an "in-process review" standard
`assesslng excellent
`and deficient work
`a more comprehensive meaningfut and igorous review of
`consfifufes quality. The resutts of an
`examinels final
`reviewed for
`quality of the substantive basrb for decislo n-making. search stratitgy. evidence, and
`witing. The measure conslders elements for
`and evaluation with training targeted to topics that
`-fufther
`Examiners are given specific feedback about excellent as wel/ as
`woik to
`improve quatity. The
`was
`exceeded
`aur
`training efforts focusing on qualry have had
`additive effeit. AIso, qiatity
`more
`improvements that first appeared in First Actions have now fittered
`to Final Actions.
`
`MEASURE: Trademark
`Acfion Deficiency Rate
`FIRST
`DEFICIENCY
`
`*. .n
`g'1
`
`I
`
`R
`
`DATA
`
`AND
`
`Data source: Office of
`
`Quality
`
`Report
`
`Frequency: Daily input, monthly reporting.
`
`Data storage: Automated systems, reports.
`
`Verification: Manual reports and analysis.
`
`Data Limitations: None.
`
`D {labouuslratplanlarz006/desc
`
`trd 1 stdefic.isp)
`
`Target and Actual First Action Deficiency Rates
`for Trademarks lssued for the Last 4 Fiscal years
`
`FY
`
`Target
`
`Actual
`
`FY
`
`8.3%
`
`7.9%
`
`FY 2005
`
`7.5"/o
`
`4.704
`
`FY 2006
`
`65%
`
`4.3% met
`
`Qrsglssion; Target met' The Trademark organization established an "in-process review" standard forassesslng excellent and
`deficient work to
`a more comprehensive, meaningful, and igorous review of
`consfif{.,fes quaw ine results af
`examinels first action
`for the quality of the substantiie basls for decrsio n-making,
`"""rri', "tit"gy, evidence, and
`witing. The new
`conslders more elements for review and
`with training tirgeted to topicsinat wanant
`improvement- Examiners are given specific feedback about excellent as uzel/ as deficient-woi to further'impive quality- euatity
`results achieved exceeded the target set.
`
`TRADEMARK PENDENCY
`
`MEASURE: Trademark Average First Action pendency (months)
`This measure reflects the
`of the first office
`as measured from the date of application filing to the first office
`action.
`Trademark organization intends to
`first action pendency to three
`by Fy 2OOg.
`
`TRADEMARK FIRST ACTION PENDENCY
`
`http://www-uspto-gov/about/stratprarlar/2a0613020200_trademrkperfjsp
`
`l1/9/20A9 9:57:33 AM
`
`€
`

`
`Trademark Performance for the
`
`2006
`
`Page 5
`
`Et
`i
`,i:
`
`s
`-l
`!:irr
`*
`*l
`S1l: ",'
`7l
`4i
`
`I
`
`,,y $t*89,,
`
`il
`LF??S*4 F{
`
`Tarspr t
`
`ilflsn$ ,
`
`g*l:lal
`
`DATA
`
`Data source: TRAM system.
`
`Frequency: Daily
`
`reporting.
`
`Data storage: TRAM, automated
`
`Verification:.Accuracy of supporting data
`performs final test for
`
`Data Limitations: None
`
`D (/about/stratplaniafl200ddesc hd 1 stpend jsp)
`
`through
`
`program edits in the TRAM system.
`
`management
`
`Target and Actual Trademark First Action Pendency
`for the Last 4 Fiscal Years
`
`FY 2003
`
`3.0
`
`54
`
`FY
`
`5.4
`
`66
`
`FY 2005
`
`6.4
`
`6.3
`
`FY
`
`5.3
`
`4.8 met
`
`Target
`
`Actual
`
`Drccussion.'Target met
`
`MEASURE: Trademark Average Total Pendency (manths)
`This measure
`related to
`of a trademark application as measured from
`registration, abandonment or
`a
`of
`including applications that
`suspended
`partes proceedings Disposal pendency, including suspended and
`involved
`partes cases,
`applications
`were
`for inter partes proceedings; disposal pendency was 1 5.5 months.
`
`to
`
`date of
`further
`or
`months. Excluding
`
`K
`
`ACTION PENDENCY
`
`,.
`F
`
`:t,
`,i:li
`
`tr
`tf
`* ,rii
`
`u
`
`fYlg*3 '. rY:&ld FT*&F5 FYr$e6
`Titrgflt I Act,ral
`
`DATA VALIDATION AND
`
`Data source:
`
`system.
`
`Frequency: Daily input, monthly reporting.
`
`Data storage:
`
`automated systems, reports.
`
`D (labouUstratplan&r/200$desc
`
`trd iotpend.isp)
`
`Verification: Accuracy of
`performs final test for
`
`Data Limitations: None.
`
`data
`
`controlled through internal program edits in the TRAM system. program management
`
`Target and Actual Trademark
`for the Last 4 Fiscal
`
`Action Pendency
`
`Targel (months)
`
`FY 2003
`ls.s
`
`FY 2004
`21.6
`
`I
`
`FY
`
`zo.s
`
`|
`
`FY
`
`18.8
`
`http://r,vww.
`
`ll/9/2{t09 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Trademar* l)erfbrmance for
`
`ycar 2006
`
`Page 6
`
`Actual (monfhsJ
`
`19.8
`
`19.5
`
`19.6
`
`18.0 met
`
`Drccussion.'Target met
`
`Trademark
`year to befter serve
`
`employee Zina Carithers
`applicants.
`
`public. The assistance
`
`this
`
`M EASURE : T rademark Efficie ncy
`This measure
`a relative indicator
`support
`
`the
`compared
`
`process as measured by the
`or office
`
`cost
`
`programs that
`
`l
`
`TRADEMARK EFFICIENCY
`. .*1.F*1 l.
`J ':
`{.:
`: 1
`fci,a i
`-t{
`rnqr;], :
`'j
`qrnn.{
`
`J,.
`-
`oJ
`
`-.L mfi mXflfrti; ,
`
`i rP'Y,l0S$ , ,, 1,,FV
`FH,IH$$; .,r.r,r ,,ilif,lt!Si$.. ,
`Taigrt fi Aetuai
`
`D (/abouUshatplan/arE006/desc trd efiic jsp)
`
`DATA
`
`AND
`
`Data source:
`
`system, Momentum, ABM
`
`Frequency: Daily
`
`quarterly reporting.
`
`Data storage:
`
`Data Warehouse, ABM
`
`Verification: Accuracy
`control review of
`by ABC
`
`Data Limitations: None
`
`is controlled
`program organization teams.
`
`program edits
`
`TRAM, Momentum, ABM
`
`euali$
`
`Target and Actual Efficiency
`Trademarks
`for the Last 4 Fiscal Years
`
`Target
`
`Actual
`
`FY 2003
`
`$683
`
`$433
`
`FY
`
`$s83
`
`$542
`
`FY 2005
`
`$701
`
`$677
`
`FY 2006
`
`$635
`
`$565 met
`
`Discussion.' Target met.
`outputs produaed. The measure
`(including assoc/afed
`af
`measure does not represent the average
`measure of USPTO products and servrces.
`< Previous Paqe 0abouustraiplanr'ar20!6,8020103 boardpatjsp) I Next
`
`the
`
`the program can operate within plan costs
`total IJSPTQ experses associafed wffr the
`by
`and suppott expensesJ by outputs (office disposats). lt should be
`procesg examine, and register a trademark since office
`
`> (labouustratplantar,?006,€020201_hdmkcqmmjsp)
`
`to
`and processing
`that
`are but one
`
`http://wrr.u'.uspto.gov/abouVstratplan/arl2oo6/3020200*tademrkperf.
`
`jsp
`
`L1/9/2009 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Trademark Perfomrance fbr the year 2006
`
`Pagc 7
`
`http://wwr..uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/20A68020200_trademrkperfjsp
`
`ll/9/2009 9:57:33 AM
`
`

`
`Perfomrance (ioal 2: Optimize Tradcmark Quality and Timeliness
`
`Page I
`
`ffi
`
`Reports >
`
`: Trademarl€inal Action
`
`95.0%
`usProAnnual t5rffdf
`93.5%
`
`I on quality have
`
`96.0%
`a more than
`
`94.2%
`
`94.10h
`
`96 4%
`97/%
`Also, quality improvements that first
`
`effet
`
`in First
`
`91.70h
`
`92.50,6
`
`93.50,6
`
`95.50,6
`
`TRADEMARK QUALITY
`
`s2.1%
`
`95.3%
`
`95.7%
`
`95.9%
`
`and rigorous review of what
`
`=ina{vAction Comoliance
`Rate
`I he Tradem'ark organization measures
`exdmination qualitv include an evaluation for all
`could be considered deficient in
`a random sampte of apptications to review rhe quatity or decision
`]dv"ffiry{Utrd@5lldfrruFgH{81f"$tB$$1Tntr''rutfgfll1"E08nT8trofiBRaYe conducted
`)ual$gFryigYvtftlH*niner's first office
`refusal.
`tpoqflg
`"in-process review" standard for assessing excellent and deficient work creates a comprehensive,
`'ePafbrstitutes quality.
`ulYiFe results of an examiner's first action
`evidence and writing.
`consider
`given feedback
`
`reviewed for the quality of the substantive basis for decision-making, search strategy,
`review and evaluation with
`to topics
`Examiners are
`improve quality.
`
`to
`
`, excluding applications,
`
`suspended
`
`awaiting
`
`action
`
`in ,nfer
`
`cases,
`
`months.
`
`that were suspended
`
`delayed far inter
`
`li
`
`.vn
`
`Iil
`
`$t
`
`xf
`i$ii':tr.r$t:H-tfi,ii?.ir.iiililifiiii+:$I!:ti:jii
`
`j.i
`
`'iil
`
`$i
`
`rr
`iii
`iili
`
`.\\iiliiiiiijjjiiiiiiiilii.t_i?iit
`
`'/d.
`
`ij.r.l.ir.l.ii;tiii.tt:jtiiiliii:i'iidllt.!i'
`
`b.J
`AA
`:iil.iiili,\-ir.iliiiti!.itidliii rir.it):i:irliii
`2.9
`
`'td tr
`
`1S6
`
`4it,fi:l' +ili+. itt'\ lrt $
`6.4
`
`p,,.9
`
`3.7
`
`21.6
`
`20.3
`
`$$i
`
`il
`r$
`
`ir
`{i
`ii
`
`iiii
`ili ii!+l+iliir:iffi
`
`ririr
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/u'eb/offi ces/com/annuallz1}7 B05A2O3 pg2 htrnl
`
`11/9/2009 10:01:56 AM
`
`

`
`Perfomance (loal 2: Optinuze'liademark Qualrty and Timeliness
`
`Trademark first action pendency measures
`
`of months from the date of application
`
`to the first office action.
`
`Trademark average total pendency measures the average
`regiskation,
`or issuance of
`parfes proceedings.
`
`of months,
`excluding
`
`date of
`that
`
`suspended
`
`to the date of disposal. Disposal
`action
`
`lnfer
`
`Disposal pendency, including suspended and inter paftes cases,
`parfes proceedings, disposal pendency was 13.4 months.
`
`15.1
`
`Excluding applications
`
`were
`
`or delayed for inter
`
`tii
`tn
`
`s:L!
`
`ts
`l'{
`
`ss
`iit
`lil-i
`tii.r,l;X.;.:Tl
`
`r,?
`liti
`iii
`
`ss
`
`$
`
`Ii
`
`ri
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`5.4
`
`6.4
`
`5.3
`
`3.7
`
`21 6
`
`20.3
`
`18.8
`173
`
`lii:ii.iriji:il,iiii1ilt\:.l.ii
`
`6.6
`
`s.3
`48
`29
`
`19.5
`196
`
`18.0
`
`15.1
`
`Target
`
`Data Verification
`
`Validation
`
`.it:1.:r:ii:iri::i:iiii.:;:iii
`
`lii t:. +,:,i.,".:;.r.,it,t:t/.tii.iti':i.jl.'j
`
`First
`
`Pendency
`
`Trademark Average
`
`Pendency
`
`*n***n****n*"*n*,r,u'i,,r,,,,r,
`
`iii
`
`reporting
`ii
`Fr"qu"ncy: Daily input,
`reports
`$ O"t" storage: TRAM, automated
`i
`Veritication. Accuraey of
`controlled through
`-
`performs final test for reasonableness
`r'i
`timitations: None
`rii
`il
`
`$i
`
`ti
`
`program edits in the TRAM system. Program management $
`ii
`
`$
`
`TRADEMARK E-FILING
`
`of trademark applications has progressed steadily over the years as a result of promotional events, increased number
`The
`applications, electronic filing, improved
`and enhancements, and
`incentives, for
`lower fees.
`
`type of
`
`The Trademark
`has
`inventory as an electronic file
`attorneys use the electronic
`
`application management process by capturing nearly '100 percent of the application
`electronic
`includes text
`image of the initial application and
`applicant and
`correspondence Examining
`process and examine
`of pending work,
`manage
`take action
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`65.0%
`
`7A.O%
`
`80.00,6
`
`90.0%
`
`73.006
`
`88.0%
`
`93.806
`
`95.4%
`
`internal program edits
`
`the TRAM
`
`$
`
`$
`and crosschecks against .
`ii
`$
`
`reporting
`systems
`controlled
`systems
`
`o'iii
`Fre{uency: Daily
`$
`$ O","
`TRAM and
`1 v.rin""tion: lgcuracy of
`-
`ii
`other
`
`ii
`
`

`
`Performance Goal
`
`Optiruze Trademark Quality and Timeliness
`
`Page 3
`
`iii
`;li Data Limitations: None
`
`l'+rr1:taii3.i:ie.?i.':ii':ilii
`
`iii$ls:ii:ilii.il:lliliiw
`
`ii:1:lri1ii;iiw
`
`2004
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`80 0%
`
`99.0%
`
`99.0016
`
`99.006
`
`98
`
`99.90,6
`
`99.90,6
`
`99.9%
`
`3.E:iiiit:tiiiiii,r$)lri.lir
`
`-n
`
`i:i:
`
`lmage
`
`System
`
`controlled through
`
`program edits in the TRAM system
`
`against
`
`.rjl
`
`ii
`ii
`
`li
`
`il
`
`SilVsYitsiittii::iiii::li.iilrilili:ii1iiii
`\
`Data source: TRAM system
`1:i.i
`Frequency: Daily input,
`il Oata storage: TRAM and automated systems
`ii
`Verin..tion: A.gcuracy of
`il
`other automated systems
`+ri Data Limitations: None
`i+rl rri:
`iiiii:iliiiii:ii:iii:ii!:iiiii
`
`+ii).]).:L::ilii):illrjii)+l
`
`.r"i:.;it"i!:t-:."iii.i:..tt:i:9
`
`TRADEMARK EFFICIENCY
`
`Measures the relative
`production.
`resources
`
`of
`
`entire
`
`examination process over time, or
`
`with which the organization applies its
`
`2804
`
`2005
`
`2006
`
`2007
`
`$s83
`
`$701
`
`$6ss
`
`$685
`
`I o"t"i"";;"1;ifi;t;i;: M;'';;il;:ilniil;il
`f reOu"ncy: Daily input, quarterly reporting
`$
`system
`il Oata storage: TRAM, Data Warehouse,
`;il
`Veritication: Acc.uracy of
`program edits
`data
`through
`TRAM, Momentum,
`-
`and program organization teams
`I
`control review of
`vq(q wy ^uv uyJrsr I I or ru pt vgt dt I I ut Vdt ilzdLtut I LEdr I ts
`by ABC
`n
`iii Data Limitations: None
`
`ii:
`
`i$.:.:*sr,+.:+r,+l,r:':,;t:rrt:l
`
`QFA'
`
`$677
`
`$565
`$660
`
`F
`
`$
`
`'
`System. euality $
`ri{
`ii
`ii
`
`< Previsus Page I Next Page >
`
`considqed and
`
`to othq improvements on
`
`.IHOME ! SITEINDEXi SEARCH i eBUSltlESs l HELP { PR'VAcypOLtCy
`
`http://wrvrn'.uspto.gor,'/web/othces/com/annual/2007/3i150203
`
`jg2.html
`
`l1/9/20Ag l0:01:56 AM
`
`

`
`Performanoe Goal 2: Optimize Tradcmark Quali\'and Timeliness
`
`Page 4
`
`http://wlrw.uspto. gor,y'u'eb/offices/com/anaual/2}07
`
`/30 502A3 jg2 html
`
`l1/9/2OO9 l0:01:56 AM
`
`

`
`Strategic Goal 2: Optimize Trademark Qualrty'and Timeliness
`
`Page 1
`
`ffi
`
`ReForts >
`
`USPTO Annual Reports
`
`nr.i
`
`nce and the qualities that allow the usPTo to
`the Trademark organization has met
`2 Stategic Plan. FY 2008
`
`progress toward its vision to "lead the
`of
`Agency performance targets,
`priorities are:
`
`and
`
`ryt of a trademark
`was consistently
`year - ending
`year rn a row
`Average total
`sined/ilrn$perdnqbrft witif dgistration occurring
`n fwo
`uiits within the
`
`orgflerRl*tncgsf,H
`to'?lJ?itfftrFrr€qb
`I Edemark ordaniTi
`Pendency has improved as electronic filing and processing represent the primary
`means of
`business with
`the
`lncreased use of electronic
`forms, particularly Trademark Electronic Application System fl-EAS) plus filings
`(which represent 26 percent of new application filings
`31 percent of
`action
`approvals) has improved the efficiency of examination as well as contributing to an
`number of applications approved for publication. Electronically filed
`increase in
`TEAS Plus applications are
`and registered on average wrthin 9.9 to 10.4
`months, whereas those filed on paper average 15.8 to
`months or 3g to 63
`percent longer.
`
`Marky,
`
`The Trademark
`continued to
`process changes to
`post€xamination proce$s, reduce costs, and lower disposal pendency. The
`Trademark organization has eliminated
`in work thereby decreasing the time between approval for publication by the examining attorney,
`publication in
`Gazette, and registration. Process
`address both quality and
`were
`management
`the
`technical support staff. The realignment of the technical support staff has had a
`and posiiive tmpact on reducing
`maintiining-oisflosal
`pendency to the lowest level in
`years.
`
`Fun in the Sun - USPTO Directar Jon Dudas
`bail
`for the Tradffiark Expo.
`
`USPTO
`
`T
`
`T-rademark Pendency Performance - The
`prtmary measures of Tademark organization processing are average first action pendency
`fist actian)
`average pendency (the time from filing untjt disposat).
`
`time
`
`to
`
`,ii. Target
`* Aqtu*t
`
`tr€Efi*t
`
`l}{er
`
`l0-
`i
`rs*
`E(} t0:
`= .r'
`
`rlji T4rg*t
`$ nrt*al
`
`firgrFr iuef
`
`:005
`
`!$s6
`
`tg67
`
`:ooti
`
`t007
`
`;ilo*
`
`8-
`
`b!
`
`*-
`J*
`!*
`
`d*
`
`F oz
`
`http : //www. uspto. gov/u'elr/oflices/comlannua l/2008/mda 02 rj3 . html
`
`11/9/2009 10:03:24 AM
`
`

`
`Expanding Telework -
`Trademarks managers (SEATED) Deputy
`Commissioner for Trademarks, Debbie Cohn, Vernon
`{SIA/VD/NG)
`Commissioner for Trademarks Lynne
`Tommie Clifton, and Susan
`White mark the expansion of the Tradmarks Work-at-Home program. The
`Trademark organizatnn sfarfed ,fs
`program more than 10 years
`ago with a focus exclusively on the job of examining aftomey. As the
`organization gained experience with work-at-home, it expanded
`work-at-
`by develDping pilot programs in two more units within the
`home
`Tmdemark oryanization.
`
`lratlemarkQuality Performance - The
`improve the quality of its products and
`prt4rcss and
`revleks.
`
`confl)lues
`reviews of
`
`in
`
`; TErg*t
`& Acrual
`
`?br$rcr llfel
`
`+= Targrt
`S *rtuai
`I ' ri" .
`targrer,l$et
`
`ll
`
`ts0s
`
`200r
`
`2oss
`
`.qt:ti
`
`2SS7
`
`W2
`
`S06
`
`:ocs
`
`10fi *
`
`95"r
`,,: " 't'.
`
`l
`
`rff9!
`
`su-
`
`Strategic Goal 2:
`
`Qualig and Timehncss
`
`IMPROVING QUALITY
`
`Searching
`examination quality continued to demonstrate high
`and
`sustained improvement. 95.8 percent of first actions and
`than 97.2
`percent of final actions
`statutory and compliance rates for quality of
`the highest levels
`decision making
`achieved. An additional
`review was added
`quality at the
`evaluate
`applications
`are approved for publication and ultimately registration.
`compliance rate
`was 98.4 percent, demonstrating the
`degree of quality that appties to
`the majority of the determinations
`the office. Advances
`also
`been
`filings. Specifically, the
`Trademark organization has made greater use of online tools and has
`process to better manage and track performance,
`improved the
`improve training,
`increase the use of electronic filing, which contribute
`to befter quality of application dala
`consistency in processing and
`examination. All newly
`examiners now complete a twelve-week training
`course on substantive and procedural examination, with an
`on
`the Trademark
`examination curriculum. The Trademark
`organization's quality results are a reflection of
`cumulative effect of six
`years of
`on the same
`assessing examination quality.
`
`the
`
`Expo from April 1 0 - 12.
`The USPTO
`event was
`role trademarks play in
`designed to
`national and global
`economy. The Expo was supported by 23 businesses that helped
`the successful event that was attended by
`people over
`three days.
`
`(fAC) received the
`The Trademark Assistance
`Telework
`Exchange Award for Best
`Telework lnitiative. The recognition was
`sponsored by the Telework Exchange@, Service Mark ($M), a public-
`private
`focused
`demonstrating
`of telework.
`tangible
`TAC is the first government call center to take advantage of telework and
`was recognized for its contribution to the quality of life
`its participants,
`customer
`goals.
`and
`The Trademark organization continues to improve on its successful
`telework program through
`continued expansion of
`and by expanding the use of remote access
`tools. Eighty-
`six percent of
`attorneys work
`home nearly full time,
`with 83 percent of all
`employees
`from
`at
`least one day per week. Fifty+ight percent of all Trademark employees
`telework. Two pilot programs for employees in TAC and Post Registration
`became permanent in
`past
`expanding the number of employees
`and
`by telework programs. Geographic
`of
`telework is currently under evaluation with a pilot
`that has 18
`examiners working
`13 states.
`The Trademark organization developed a Trademark Human Capital
`Strategic Plan in support of the
`Strategic plan.
`Human
`organized to develop
`Seven teams
`project
`schedules and
`in support of the three "human capital"
`of
`talent management,
`culture, and leadership
`and knowledge management. Progress has been made on specific
`programs and
`that support the objectives such as
`to retain a
`highly qualified diverse
`improving training opportunities,
`expanding and improving the Telework
`ensuring performance
`appraisal plans have
`performance standards that
`with
`Agency goals; maximizing awareness and
`of incentive awards and
`recognition programs; and improving
`and external
`Results from the Department of Commerce employee survey indicate
`the Trademark organization leads the USPTO
`4O survey responses
`with strengths in the
`management and personal work experience
`categories
`
`

`
`Strategic Goal 2:
`
`Trademark Quality and'l'imelincss
`
`Page 3
`
`Eclucating the Community - The
`Trademark Expo. at the
`USPIO Alexandria campus, aftracted awide
`more than
`7,QQ0 people. The event
`on educating the pubtic about the
`value and impoftant role trademarks play in society and the global
`marketplace. lt featutes themed displays, company booths,
`costumed characters,
`exhibits. and tradenark-retated
`seminars for aftendees.
`
`E-Filing Applications - The percent of trademark applications filed
`electronically has steadily increased over
`past four years to the current
`of 96.9 percent.
`
`r{l.r
`&r Aftuel
`
`. I
`
`+rg€t
`
`lt4Et
`
`ss
`
`?o$;
`
`?s08
`
`D
`
`r0{ -
`,l
`90*
`
`*s.-
`
`'7S-
`
`60*
`
`5$:
`
`Trademrk Emciency - This following metric measures the relafive cost-
`ei7ectlveness of the ent