Strategic Plan > Index to Action Papers > Competitively Source Reclassification Functions and Transition to International Patent Classification System

Action:

Competitively source reclassification functions and transfer application dispute resolution function to Patent Corps management. 

Background Information:

·       Dedicated staff resources devoted to classification activities has declined since 1995: 140 staff years + about 12 examiner staff years in 1995 to 90 staff years  + about 4 examiner staff years.

·       Reclassification effort has declined since 1995 while other classification workloads (application classification, application disputes) have increased.

·       Classification staff is increasingly called upon to provide direct support for other organizations, including Office of Initial Patent Examination (OIPE), classification and docketing in art units, and Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).

·       Application assignment disputes workload now absorbs 17 staff years, or about 45 percent of classifiers' time annually. 

·       The U.S. led reform of the International Patent Classification (IPC) is scheduled for implementation in January 2005.  Also, Trilateral Offices (the European Patent Office, the Japan Patent Office and the USPTO) have agreed to work toward harmonizing their classification systems.

Substantial progress has recently been made in the IPC Reform process towards the establishment of objective standards for "what" to classify within a patent document and "where" to classify that material with a classification schedule.  This is a marked improvement over the old IPC subjective standards of "best fit" which required significant expertise in a particular art as well as a great amount of "guesswork" as to where to search a particular invention. 

Options Considered:

All options have in common the competitive sourcing of the reclassification of documents into new classification schemes.  This constitutes about 60-70 percent of time spent on professional reclassification.  It is also assumed that Pre-Grant Publications (PGPubs) and initial application classification for assignment will be contracted out as planned, which will free about 27 staff years of classifier and technician time currently spent on these functions.

Option 1:

  Competitively source reclassification of documents into new schemes. Transfer classifiers to examining art units under existing hybrid classifier/examiner position to examine patent applications (30 percent of time), handle application disputes (45 percent of time), and create new classification schemes (25 percent of time).  Three classifiers remain full time to maintain classification standards.  Supervisory Patent Classifiers (5) coordinate reclassification work in Technology Centers (TCs), and serve as an appeal panel for final resolution of application assignment disputes.  The Supervisory Patent Classifiers (5) would coordinate reclassification work in TCs and continue to serve as appeal panel in TCs to resolve assignment disputes between TCs.  Classification technicians and half of Tech Support staff continue classification work.

This option would result in transfer of fewest (11) classifier staff years to patent examining.  Classification Technicians would continue to reclassify documents in selected technologies, which would avoid the need for reassigning them to other mid level (GS-11) positions, and fewer contractor resources would be needed for reclassification of documents.

By assigning classifiers to the classifier/examiner hybrid position, this option provides more staffing flexibility for the TCs.

Option 2:

  Competitively source functions as in option 1, and additionally transfer application dispute resolution function to Patent Corps management (i.e., Supervisory Patent Examiners).  Transfer classifiers to examining art units under hybrid classifier/examiner positions to examine patent applications (up to 75 percent of their time), and to work on critical reclassification projects (25 percent of time).  Two classifiers would remain full time to maintain classification standards.  The Supervisory Patent Classifiers (5) would coordinate reclassification work in TCs and would continue to assist the Technology Centers on classification issues.  Classification technicians and half of Tech Support staff would continue classification work.

This option would result in transfer of 28 classifier staff years to patent examining.  All benefits listed under Option 1 would also apply.

Note that all but two (2) classifiers (who are responsible to maintain classification standards) were reassigned to the examiner/classifier hybrid positions in October 2002 in accordance with a negotiated agreement. 

Option 3:

  Competitively source and transfer classification functions as in Option 2, and additionally the development of new classification schemes. All but a few classifiers and the Supervisory Patent Classifiers would be assigned to examining functions full time.  All Classification Technicians and Tech support staff in the Classification Units would be reassigned to other duties to be determined.

This option would result in the largest amount of work outsourced to the private sector and the greatest number of classifier (37) staff years that could be redirected to patent examining functions.

USPTO Recommended Course of Action

Option 2 has been initially selected.  If a pilot and proof of concept prove successful, a migration to Option 3 would be considered since it would result in the greatest number of Government staff year savings that could be reprogrammed to patent examining functions.  Also, in the near future the transition will be made to the reformed IPC, which will provide a robust and efficient IPC-extended system.

Proof of Concept:

The USPTO would implement a pilot program to test the feasibility of competitive sourcing all reclassification functions.  This would allow the Office to monitor the success of the program and implement the full-scale operation in stages.

The Office would prepare a statement of work and would issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a pilot contract.  It is anticipated that a small sampling of work would be outsourced and measured.

The measurable objectives of this pilot would include the contractors' ability to perform the work in an effective and efficient manner.  Critical measures of success include the contractors' performance, quality, timeliness, and program feasibility.  The pilot would last for six months and data would be collected throughout the life of the pilot.  The Office would perform a thorough quality review on all work provided by the contractors, and would measure it against current Office performance. 

The report would be open for general review and discussion prior to a decision to move forward with further implementation of the contract.

Return on Investment:

Benefits include additional examining resources and a higher level of reclassification activities than has been performed in the past.

 

KEY: =online business system =fees =forms=help =laws/regulations =definition (glossary) Is there a question about what the USPTO can or cannot do that you cannot find an answer for? Send questions about USPTO programs and services to the USPTO Contact Center (UCC). You can suggest USPTO webpages or material you would like featured on this section by E-mail to the webmaster@uspto.gov. While we cannot promise to accommodate all requests, your suggestions will be considered and may lead to other improvements on the website.