Year-End Information Quality Report Format

I. Cover Sheet: Requests for Correction Received FY 2003

Department Name: DOC/USPTO

Period Covered: October 1, 2002 – September 30, 2003

Agency Name Number of Requests Received Number Designated as Influential

USPTO 1 0

------- ------ ------

------- ------ ------

------- ------ ------

Total Total

1 0

DOC/USPTO 1^st Annual Fiscal Year 2003 Information Quality Report

• Agency Receiving Correction Request: DOC/USPTO

• Requestor: Marcella D. Watkins

Reg. No. 36,962

Conley Rose &Tayon, P.C.

600 Travis St., Suite 7100

Houston, TX 77002-2912

(713) 238-8043

mwatkins@crtlaw.com

• Date Received: October 2, 2002, received via electronic mail

• Summary of Request: US Patent No. 6,344,272 issued on February 5, 2002. When the patent was processed for publication, the contractor identified the wrong set of claims in the file wrapper, with the result that the patent was disseminated (posted on the PTO website etc.) with incorrect claims. The entire claim set, including Claim 1, is incorrect because it does not reflect amendments made during the latter half of the prosecution of the case. A Certificate of Correction has been granted, but Applicant requests that the patent be re-disseminated with the corrected claims.

• Description of Requested Correction: Applicant requests that the PTO re-disseminate U.S. Patent No. 6,344,272 after replacing the incorrect claim set with the correct claim set.

Specifically, Applicant requests that the PTO, WIPO, and other websites containing text-searchable versions of the patent be corrected to contain the claim set that was ultimately allowed. Because Applicant has already identified the error to the USPTO and has received a Certificate of Correction, Applicant believes that no further review of the underlying error is required.

Furthermore, Applicant believes that the necessary electronic file, containing the corrected claims, has already been generated and exists in the PTO as a result of the generation of the Certificate of Correction.

• Influential: ____ Yes __X__ No ____ Undetermined

• First Agency Response: ____ in progress __X__ completed

USPTO responded November 21, 2002

• Resolution: The requestor was provided a letter response as follows:

In your correspondence you indicate that your client has obtained a certificate of correction for errors that existed in the patent at the time it was issued. Your concerns are that the certificate of correction can only be found by going to the last pages of the USPTO image search files, and that the corrections cannot be found by searching the text search database. You also express concerns that other countries cannot find the changes in a text search database.

Your understanding of the certificate of correction practice for the USPTO is correct. No text searching of corrections can be done at the current time. When the system was developed the procedures you have described were decided upon as the most economical way in which to provide data searching capabilities to the public in the shortest amount of time. To make changes to the existing system to allow for text searching of the corrections that are made would be both costly, and time consuming. As I am sure you are aware, the USPTO is currently working on an electronic filing system in which all applications will be presented to the USPTO in an electronic format and in which all prosecution can be done electronically. The majority of the financial resources available for automation improvement are being channeled into the development of the new system. Hopefully the types of changes that you would like to see will be possible as the new system evolves.

You might find it encouraging to know that later this fiscal year changes are being made to the existing system to allow for changes to the bibliographic information, and these data changes will be able to be searched using the existing text search database.

With regard to your concerns about other countries databases not being able to search corrections that have been made, the USPTO does not have any control over the type of system that other countries utilize for searching, or what data they add to their system. We have contracts with other countries to provide them copies of patents that we grant but it is the decision of each individual country receiving that data as to whether or not they add it to their respective database. Thus the USPTO cannot require other countries to make changes in their system for any corrections that we make by certificate of correction.

I have spoken with sources inside the USPTO who are responsible for the development of the software that is used to provide the text searches you have requested. They have assured me that the concerns you have expressed are known, and that future modifications to allow for changes to the text search database are being considered.

Thank you for bringing your concern to our attention. While I recognize that the above might not provide the type of answer that you are seeking, it sets forth the policy and procedures that are currently available.

• Appeal Request: __X__ none ____ in progress ____ completed

• Summary of Request for Reconsideration: Not Applicable (N/A)

• Type of Appeal Process Used: Not Applicable (N/A)

• Appeal Resolution: Not Applicable (N/A)

Sections X. and XI. from the USPTO Information Quality Guidelines

X. CIO RESPONSIBILITIES

The Chief Information Officer of the USPTO will be responsible for the administrative mechanisms to track complaints, appeals, resolutions; and on a fiscal-year basis, submit a report to the Director of OMB providing information (both quantitative and qualitative, where appropriate) on the number and nature of complaints received by the agency regarding agency compliance with the OMB information quality guidelines and how such complaints were resolved.

XI. AFFECTED PERSON RESPONSIBILITIES

A. Requests to correct information maintained and disseminated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that are subject to all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.

1. Any affected person may request, where appropriate, correction of USPTO information that does not comply with all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines. The burden is on the affected person to show both the necessity for correction and type of correction sought. Additionally, the affected person has the burden of rebutting the presumption that information subjected to formal, independent peer review is objective. Any affected person may submit a request directly to the USPTO, in accordance with the procedures contained in these guidelines.

2. Initial requests for correction of USPTO information must first be made through the USPTO Contact Center (UCC) (GISD) Help Desk for tracking and reporting purposes. The GISD Help Desk will route requests to the appropriate business unit within the USPTO.

3. All requests must be made using one of the following methods:

a. Electronic Mail:

usptoinfo@uspto.gov

Please include “Data Quality” in the Subject Line.

b. Telephone:

800-786-9199 or 703-308-4357 – at the prompt, press 1 for General Patent and Trademark Information

Please let the GISD Help Desk person know that you are reporting a Data Quality problem.

c. U.S. Postal Service:

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

USPTO Contact Center (UCC)

ATTN: Data Quality

Crystal Plaza 3, Room 2C02

Washington, DC 20231

U.S.A.

4. A request for correction of USPTO disseminated information will not be considered under these guidelines concerning:

a. A matter not involving “information”, as that term is defined in (Section IV.A.4.).

b. Information that has not actually been “disseminated”, as that term is defined in (Section IV.A.1.a.b.).

c. Disseminated information the correction of which would serve no useful purpose.

d. Requests that are duplicative, repetitious, or frivolous may be rejected. This does not preclude a request for correction alleging a recurring or systemic problem resulting in repeated similar or consistent errors.

5. Initial requests for correction must include:

a. requester’s name

b. requester’s telephone number

c. requester’s electronic mail (e-mail) address (optional if submitting by telephone, U.S. Postal Service, or overnight courier)

d. requester’s return address (required only if submitting by U.S. Postal Service, or overnight courier)

e. an accurate citation to and a description of the particular information disseminated that is the subject of the request for correction (For recurring or systemic errors, please provide a few examples (no more than 50)).

f. an explanation of:

i. how the requester is affected by the alleged error

ii. how the information at issue fails to comply with (these) USPTO information quality guidelines or the applicable OMB guidelines

iii. why the requester believes that the disseminated information is not correct

6. Affected persons will be given a problem ticket number for each request via one of the following methods: electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S. Postal Service.

7. For proper requests (i.e., requests that include all applicable elements of (Section XI.A.5. above)), the business unit will notify the requester via electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S. Postal Service of the initial decision within 60 calendar days after receipt of the request with an appropriate explanation of the decision being made. If the request requires more than 60 calendar days to resolve, the business unit will inform the requester within the first 60 calendar days that more time is required indicating the reason why more time is required and an estimated decision date.

8. If a problem ticket gets misdirected to the wrong USPTO business unit, additional effort will be taken by the USPTO to identify and route the problem ticket to the appropriate business unit. Once the misdirected problem ticket gets to the appropriate business unit, the business unit will have 60 calendar days from receipt to respond to the requester via electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S. Postal Service.

9. A proper request received concerning information disseminated as part of and during the pendency of the comment period on a proposed rule, plan, or other action, including a request concerning the information forming the record of decision for such proposed rule, plan or action will be treated as a comment filed on that proposed rulemaking, plan, or action, and be addressed in the issuance of any final rule, plan, or action. However, where the requester demonstrates immediate actual harm or the substantial likelihood of actual harm arising from that dissemination prior to issuance of the final rule, plan, or action, the USPTO will provide a timely response before issuing the final rule, plan or action, if doing so will not significantly delay the issuance of the final rule, plan, or action.

10. For improper requests (i.e., requests that do not include all applicable elements of (Section XI.A.5. above) or contain errors), the requester will be contacted and notified of the omission or error within 60 calendar days. The requester has the option of amending or correcting the problem ticket record by contacting the GISD Help Desk. If the original request is not amended or corrected, the USPTO will close the problem ticket. If the requester cannot be contacted because of an omission or error, the problem ticket will be closed. All requests will be counted in the USPTO’s annual fiscal year report to OMB.

11. If the USPTO decides not to correct the disseminated information, then the affected person may appeal that decision within 60 calendar days. The appeal will follow the same path as Initial Requests, with the following exceptions:

a. Upon receipt of an initial adverse decision (not to correct), the initial requester has 60 calendar days to submit an appeal. The appeal should be submitted according to (Section XI.A.5. above). Additionally, the appeal should include a statement of the reason(s) why the requester believes the initial adverse decision was incorrect.

b. To maintain continuity, the USPTO requires the problem ticket number from the initial request. The original problem ticket will be reopened/updated to reflect an appeal and assigned to the next highest organizational level.

c. If the appeal requester is not able to provide the previous problem ticket number, then the request will be considered an initial request and not an appeal. A new problem ticket number will be assigned by the GISD Help Desk.

d. The designated person at the next highest organizational level will notify the appeal requester via electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S. Postal Service of the appeal decision within 60 calendar days after receipt of the appeal with an appropriate explanation of the decision being made. If the appeal requires more than 60 calendar days to resolve, the business unit will inform the requester within the first 60 calendar days that more time is required indicating the reason why more time is required and an estimated decision date.

12.No opportunity for personal appearance, oral argument, or hearing on appeal is provided.

Request for Correction submitted via electronic mail:

EAMS Case ID HD0000000489426

Below is the USPTO's first Information Quality request submitted 10/02/2002 regarding patent# 6,344,272.

From : MWatkins@crtlaw.com

Date : Wed, 02 Oct 2002 11:10:51 -0400

To: usptoinfo@uspto.gov

Cc: achapa@crtlaw.com, MWatkins@crtlaw.com

Subject : Data Quality (US Patent No. 6,344,272)

Dear Sirs:

This submission is made under the provisions of the new USPTO Information Quality Guidelines of October 1, 2002.

Summary of Request: US Patent No. 6,344,272 issued on February 5, 2002. When the patent was processed for publication, the contractor identified the wrong set of claims in the file wrapper, with the result that the patent was disseminated (posted on the PTO website etc.) with incorrect claims. The entire claim set, including Claim 1, is incorrect because it does not reflect amendments made during the latter half of the prosecution of the case. A Certificate of Correction has been granted, but Applicant requests that the patent be re-disseminated with the corrected claims.

Request for Correction: Applicant requests that the PTO re-disseminate U.S. Patent No. 6,344,272 after replacing the incorrect claim set with the correct claim set.

Specifically, Applicant requests that the PTO, WIPO, and other websites containing text-searchable versions of the patent be corrected to contain the claim set that was ultimately allowed. Because Applicant has already identified the error to the USPTO and has received a Certificate of Correction, Applicant believes that no further review of the underlying error is required.

Furthermore, Applicant believes that the necessary electronic file, containing the corrected claims, has already been generated and exists in the PTO as a result of the generation of the Certificate of Correction.

Information Required under Section XI (A) (5)

a. Requester's name: Marcella Watkins, Attorney for Applicant, Reg. No. 36,962

b. Requester's telephone number: (713) 238-8043

c. Requester's email address: mwatkins@crtlaw.com

d. Requester's return address: Marcella Watkins

Conley Rose & Tayon, P.C.

600 Travis St., Suite 7100

Houston, TX 77002-2912

e. Description of the disseminated information: U.S. Patent No. 6,344,272, and more specifically: all claims in U.S. Patent No. 6,344,272.

The originally-issued patent had 49 claims. These claims were the claims that were allowed before the filing of a continued prosecution application (CPA) and various other amendments that preceded the final allowance of the case. The correct claim set should have 54 claims and should reflect those later amendments. As mentioned above, Applicant believes that the necessary electronic file, containing the corrected claims, has already been generated and exists in the PTO as a result of the generation of the Certificate of Correction

f. Explanations:

i. The patentee is affected by the dissemination of the incorrect claim set because users of the PTO, WIPO, and other electronic databases are not likely to become aware of the correction of the claim set and will therefore evaluate the patent on the basis of the wrong claims. Because Certificates of Correction are only accessable in "Image" form, the corrected claims are not text-searchable. The searchable disseminated text contains no indication that a Certificate of Correction has been issued. Furthermore, because Certificates of Correction typically contain corrections of errors that are only minor in nature, and because the images are relatively difficult or slow to access and review (as compared to the searchable text) users of the online databases are not likely to view the Certificate of Correction or become aware of the corrected claim set in the present case.

ii. The information fails to comply with the quality guidelines because the disseminated patent (text file) contains an incorrect claim set. The error is objectively apparent upon a review of the file wrapper, and has been confirmed by the granting of a Certificate of Correction.

iii. The requester believes [knows] that the disseminated information is not correct because the requester prosecuted the patent in question and has first-hand knowledge of the correct content of the allowed claims. Requester has viewed the disseminated patent on the uspto.org website and confirmed that the claims available in the text format are not the claims that were ulimately allowed.

Requester believes that the foregoing recitations satisfy the requirements set out in the USPTO Information Quality Guidelines. If any additional information or explanation is required, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted,

s/Marcella Watkins/

Marcella D. Watkins

Reg. No. 36,962

Conley Rose & Tayon, P.C.

600 Travis St., Suite 7100

Houston, TX 77002-2912

(713) 238-8043

USPTO Response to the Request for Correction:

(Provided on USPTO letterhead with appropriate signatures)

November 21, 2002

Ms. Marcella Watkins

Conley, Rose & Taynon, P.C.

600 Travis St., Suite 7100

Houston, TX 77002-2912

Dear Ms. Watkins:

Thank you for your Internet correspondence concerning data quality issues that you have with the way the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) makes corrections to patents that have been issued. Your transmission has been forwarded to me for response.

In your correspondence you indicate that your client has obtained a certificate of correction for errors that existed in the patent at the time it was issued. Your concerns are that the certificate of correction can only be found by going to the last pages of the USPTO image search files, and that the corrections cannot be found by searching the text search database. You also express concerns that other countries cannot find the changes in a text search database.

Your understanding of the certificate of correction practice for the USPTO is correct. No text searching of corrections can be done at the current time. When the system was developed the procedures you have described were decided upon as the most economical way in which to provide data searching capabilities to the public in the shortest amount of time. To make changes to the existing system to allow for text searching of the corrections that are made would be both costly, and time consuming. As I am sure you are aware, the USPTO is currently working on an electronic filing system in which all applications will be presented to the USPTO in an electronic format and in which all prosecution can be done electronically. The majority of the financial resources available for automation improvement are being channeled into the development of the new system. Hopefully the types of changes that you would like to see will be possible as the new system evolves.

You might find it encouraging to know that later this fiscal year changes are being made to the existing system to allow for changes to the bibliographic information, and these data changes will be able to be searched using the existing text search database.

With regard to your concerns about other countries databases not being able to search corrections that have been made, the USPTO does not have any control over the type of system that other countries utilize for searching, or what data they add to their system. We have contracts with other countries to provide them copies of patents that we grant but it is the decision of each individual country receiving that data as to whether or not they add it to their respective database. Thus the USPTO cannot require other countries to make changes in their system for any corrections that we make by certificate of correction.

I have spoken with sources inside the USPTO who are responsible for the development of the software that is used to provide the text searches you have requested. They have assured me that the concerns you have expressed are known, and that future modifications to allow for changes to the text search database are being considered.

Thank you for bringing your concern to our attention. While I recognize that the above might not provide the type of answer that you are seeking, it sets forth the policy and procedures that are currently available. If you require any further assistance specific to this communication, please feel free to contact me at (703) 308-6874.

Sincerely,

Randall L. Green

Supervisory Petitions Examiner

Office of Petitions

Office of the Deputy Commissioner

for Patent Examination Policy