G408: IP Pendency Survey 2024

OMB Control Number: 0651-0080

Expiration Date: XX/XX/XXXX

A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with an information collection subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, unless the information collection has a valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Number for this information collection is 0651-0080. Public burden for this survey is estimated to average 10 minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information collection. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden to the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, United States Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 or email InformationCollection@uspto.gov.

Introduction:

Due to differing laws and procedures in each jurisdiction, IP5 Offices around the world measure pendency in various ways. There are a number of reports, including the IP5 Statistics Report, which contain pendency metrics from multiple IP Offices. The goal of this survey is to better understand the needs of the IP community related to pendency data, and how the members of the IP community currently utilize pendency and the USPTO’s Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) compliance rate information.

(Please note that all questions have a rating scale of strongly agree to strongly disagree, unless otherwise noted.)

1. Demographics section:

1. I most commonly interact with the following intellectual property office: (select one)

   1. European Patent Office (EPO)

   2. Japan Patent Office (JPO)

   3. United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

   4. China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)

   5. Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)

   6. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

   7. National Patent Offices in Europe (specify)

   8. Other (Please specify)

   9. NA

2. I most commonly file patent applications at the following office first:

   1. European Patent Office (EPO)

   2. Japan Patent Office (JPO)

   3. United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

   4. China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)

   5. Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)

   6. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

   7. National Patent Offices in Europe (specify)

   8. Other (Please specify)

   9. NA

3. My primary affiliation is the following:

   1. Government agency

   2. University or college

   3. Research Organization or individual researcher

   4. Law firm or practitioner (not corporate)

   5. Industry group

   6. Business or corporation (excluding small business)

   7. Independent inventor or small business

   8. Other (specify)

4. If they answer b or c, ask: Please indicate your research focus:

   1. Science

   2. Technology

   3. Economics

   4. Legal

   5. Other (specify)

2. Specific questions on pendency/use/filing strategies:

1. I use reports, such as the IP5 Statistics Report, when developing my filing strategies (e.g., which office to file first):

   1. Rating scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

2. At each IP5 Office, it is clear how long it will take on average to reach the following: (Matrix style question: along the columns would be the offices: EPO, JPO, KIPO, CNIPA, USPTO. Select all that apply)

   1. An initial opinion on patentability for a patent application

   2. A final opinion on patentability that results in either the grant of a patent or the abandonment/withdrawal/refusal of a patent application

3. To understand how long the patent process takes, it would be helpful (e.g., for the purpose of forecasting/predicting the timing of events around patent applications in various regions) if the following metrics were shared from each of the IP5 offices: (grid question format, check boxes for each office (EPO, JPO, KIPO, CNIPA, USPTO) and check all that apply)

   1. Average time between filing and first examiner action

   2. Average time between filing and final decision

   3. Average time between filing and request for examination

   4. Average time between request for examination and first action

   5. Average time between request for examination and final decision

   6. Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) Compliance rate

   7. Others (specify)

4. I find the following metrics important when developing my filing strategies (e.g., which office to file first): (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

   1. Pendency metrics

   2. Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) Compliance rate (USPTO)

   3. Filing trends

   4. Worksharing program availability (e.g., Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH))

   5. Examination rates

   6. Quality metrics (e.g., allowance rates, appeal rates)

   7. Geography of IP Protection

   8. Other (specify)

5. I find Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) compliance measures clear and understandable.

   1. Rating scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

6. Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) compliance measures provide what I need.

   1. Rating scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

7. To better inform my filing strategies, I would also like to see:

   1. Open ended

3. Customer Experience:

1. In my experience, patent process milestones have occurred in the expected time at the following offices: (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

   1. European Patent Office (EPO)

   2. Japan Patent Office (JPO)

   3. United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

   4. China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA)

   5. Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO)

   6. Others (specify)

2. My past experience with a given office has affected my future filing strategies (e.g., which office to file first).

   1. Rating scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

3. My experience with a given office meets my expectations.

   1. Rating scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)