PTO Glossary Pilot Prog. External Survey

Glossary Pilot Program External Survey

Instructions: Please complete one survey per application after filing your response to the first Office action on the merits (i.e. non-final action, allowance, or Ex Parte Quayle). A restriction is not considered to be an action on the merits.

Questions:

1. How did you hear about the Glossary Pilot Program? (choose all that apply)

   • USPTO Website

   • Federal Register Notice announcing the Glossary Pilot Program

   • Public event hosted by the USPTO, e.g., roundtable or forum

   • USPTO Flyer mailed with Office action

   • Other [blank box for specific]

2. Including this application, how many applications did you or your organization file using the Glossary Pilot Program?

   • 1-3

   • 4-6

   • 7-9

   • 10 or more

3. Which of the following best describes the applicants for this application?

   • Micro entity

   • Small entity

   • Other [blank box for specific]

4. Which of the following best describes your role with respect to this application?

   • Attorney/Agent of record

   • Pro se Inventor/applicant

   • Assignee and/or Applicant (not pro se)

   • Other [blank box for specific]

5. The Technology Center from which you received an Office action is:

• Technology Center 2100

• Technology Center 2400

• Technology Center 2600

  • Technology Center 3600

6. Based on the Office action received in this pilot program, do you believe that the glossary definitions had any of the following effects with respect to claim clarity (choose all that apply):

• Facilitated compact prosecution

• Improved claim clarity

• More clearly defined the boundaries of the claims

• Improved the examiner’s understanding of functional language used in the claims

• Improved the examiner’s claim construction

• Avoided/reduced indefiniteness, enablement and written description rejections

• Improved examiner application of art

• Other [provide space for open ended text answer]

7. Based on the Office action received in this pilot program, do you believe that the glossary definitions had any of the following effects with respect to clarity of the record (choose all that apply):

• Clarified the record with regard to claim construction

• Clarified the record with regard to functional language limitations

• Clarified the record with regard to invoking 35 USC 112(f)

• Clarified the record with regard to the corresponding structure for 35 USC 112(f) limitations

• Other [provide space for open ended text answer]

8. Based on your experience with the Glossary Pilot Program, how do you intend to alter your application drafting practice in the future:

• I am less likely to include a glossary in future patent applications

• I would define fewer claim terms in a glossary in future patent applications

• I would define more claim terms in a glossary in future patent applications

• I am more likely to include a glossary in future patent applications

• No change (Optional. Please explain) [Open ended text answer]

• Other [provide space for open ended text answer]

9. Relative to an application specification without a glossary section, how much extra effort was expended in drafting an application specification compliant with the pilot program’s requirements?

• none

• slight

• moderate

• significant

Optional. Please explain your choice. [Open ended text answer]

10. Did the benefits of the glossary pilot program outweigh any additional efforts expended in drafting an application specification compliant with the pilot program’s requirements?

• yes

• mostly

• somewhat

• no

Optional- Please explain your choice. [Open ended text answer]

Please provide any other feedback or comments that you have regarding your experience with the glossary pilot program:

[Open ended text answer]