Following up on this post, the USPTO has released its case study topics:
1) Evaluation of the deviation of 35 U.S.C. §101 rejections from official guidance, correctness of rejections and completeness of the analysis. This study will evaluate whether examiners are properly making subject matter eligibility rejections under 35 U.S.C. §101 and clearly communicating their reasoning.
2) Review of consistency of the application of 35 U.S.C. §101 across art units/technology centers. This study will take a look at applications with related technologies located in different art units or technology centers and determine whether similar claims are being treated dissimilarly under 35 U.S.C. §101.
3) The practice of compact prosecution when 35 U.S.C. §101 rejections are made. This study will determine whether all appropriate rejections are being made in a first Office action when a subject matter eligibility issue is also identified.
4) Correctness and clarity of motivation statements in 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections. This study will evaluate whether reasons for combining references set forth in rejections under 35 U.S.C. §103 are being set forth clearly and with correct motivation to combine statements.
5) Enforcement of 35 U.S.C. §112(a) written description in continuing applications. This study will evaluate claims in continuing applications to determine if they contain subject matter unsupported by an original parent application and whether examiners are appropriately enforcing the requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112(a) written description.
6) Consistent treatment of claims after the May 2014 35 U.S.C. §112(f) training. This study will determine whether claims invoking 35 U.S.C. §112(f) are being properly interpreted and treated.
The last two were on the list of proposals that CCIA highlighted in the post. All of these have the potential to provide some good information about the examination process. Certainly, the choice of topics shows that the USPTO is listening to people’s concerns and making a real effort to identify problems in patent examination in order to improve patent quality.
We are definitely looking forward to seeing what the USPTO finds out with these studies.