|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Community of Lifelong Learners - PTO University Graduation 1998
By Karen Barley
As the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) becomes a high performance organization, the number of graduates of PTO University keeps growing. On June 16, 1998, one hundred employees became PTO University alumni and joined an elite group of PTO employees who have made a lifelong commitment to learning.
The recent PTO University graduates celebrated their achievement during the PTO University Graduation Ceremony at the Crystal City Sheraton before a crowd of 650 family members, friends, colleagues, and supervisors. The graduates hailed from all corners of PTO: 16 from Trademarks, 52 from Patents, 5 from CIO, 19 from the Associate Commissioner's area, and 8 from offices under the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner.
Ms. Janice Lachance, Director of the Office of Personnel Management, addressed the graduates with congratulations on behalf of the President and Vice President of the United States. Ms. Lachance commended PTO for creating such an innovative way to build a community of lifelong learners. She noted that lifelong learning is a cornerstone of President Clinton's educational plan and that PTO University is making his vision a true reality.
DeWitt Howard, a Program Analyst in the Office of Trademark Services who received a Career Studies Certificate and an Associate's Degree through PTO-U, delivered a powerful message about education's role in remaining employable. Mr. Howard recognized that he is a living example of lifelong learning as he quipped, "It's OK to be 57 and earn a degree."
Mr. Howard and the community of lifelong learners created by the PTO University Graduating Class of 1998 was led by a unique blend of PTO management representatives, academic counterparts, and union officials. From the management community, the graduates were led by a distinguished panel of PTO officials. Mr. Philip G. Hampton, II, Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks, presented each graduate with a certificate on behalf of Commissioner Lehman, Ms. Gloria Gutiérrez, Acting Deputy Associate Commissioner for Administration and Quality Services and Administrator for Human Resources and Public Affairs, announced each graduate while Ms. Alethea Long-Green, Director of Human Resources, was the mistress of ceremonies.
From the academic community, PTO officials were joined by Dr. Max Bassett, Dean of Academic and Student Services at Northern Virginia Community College; Dr. Roger Whitaker, Assistant Vice President of Academic Development and Continuing Education at George Washington University; Dr. Robert Otten, Dean of the Center for Comprehensive Learning at Marymount University; and Dr. Astrid Merget, Associate Dean of the Maxwell School and Chair of Public Administration at Syracuse University. These representatives awarded each graduate with a certificate or degree from their respective colleges.
Finally, the community of lifelong learners observed the honoring of the contributions of the PTO University Partnership Working Group-Ms. Ollie Person, President NTEU-243, Mr. Howard Friedman, President NTEU-245, and Mr. Ron Stern, President Patent Office Professional Association.
The staff of PTO University is available to answer any questions about enrolling in PTO University to earn a certificate or degree. To contact PTO University, dial 308-5315.
CONGRATULATIONS to all 1998 PTO University graduates.
Commissioner's Corner
: Celebrating National Inventors' Month
Ingenuity certainly is mankind's most unique attribute. It is the ability to invent that sets man apart from all other creatures on our planet. At this very moment, somewhere in America, an exceptional idea is being formulated. This momentous event might take place in a corporate laboratory, a machine shop, a garage, a basement, on a farm, on a boat, or in a car.
Great ideas can emerge anywhere. Ideas honor no limits. They acknowledge no boundaries. They favor neither color nor sex nor national origin. Ideas come in all sizes, and any one of them may hold enormous potential for each of us. Growing deep within the mind of a person, or perhaps forged from the cooperative thinking of a handful of individuals working in concert, an idea can take the shape of an invention.
Then, the invention is wrapped as a patent application and brought to the PTO. The invention will be subjected to the careful scrutiny of a patent examiner. Ultimately, this invention, protected by a patent grant, will be launched into the competitive marketplace. And, one day, we may find our lives have changed tremendously because of this patented invention. Perhaps the change will be in the way we live, how well we live, or even how long we live.
Does this really happen? Of course, it does. Does it happen often? Yes, all the time. In fact, every day, our Office receives nearly 600 of these "new ideas." And the majority of these ideas come from Americans. So, in terms of innovation, our future looks great.
The sad part about all of this is that most people lose sight of the source of all this innovation. Happy and comfortable with a world rich with inventions, they quickly forget about the individuals with the wisdom and energy to devise ingenious solutions to long-standing problems. They can't recall reading about that crack research team working day and night to overcome a major technical challenge. And, though they well know the television celebrity who hawks a favorite product, they never will know the lone inventor who labored for years at a basement workbench to perfect the concept from which the product sprang.
In a very real sense, these individuals - - inventors and creators - - are the heroes of our economy. Though the sparks of their imagination define our very lives, most of us relegate inventors to the shadows of this world. We seldom give inventors a thought, nor even know their names. Hopefully, a national movement that begins this month will help to cast rays of sunlight into those shadows. August 1998 is being declared National Inventors' Month.
The Patent and Trademark Office is happy to join the creators of this concept, the United Inventors Association of the USA, the Academy of Applied Science, Inventors Digest magazine, along with a fast-growing number of other partners in support of this national celebration. The objective will be to bring the world's attention to inventors and to spotlight them as heroes, as precious national resources.
In keeping with the spirit of this grand idea, I have directed that the PTO's newest museum exhibit be dedicated to this celebration of National Inventors' Month. It is especially important that those of us who are part of the PTO family recall that inventors are our very reason for existing.
National Inventors' Month is a time to marvel at the progress
brought to us by that defining attribute called inventiveness. More especially, it is an
opportunity to reflect upon the enormous debt we owe to those special people who dared to
put their inventive talents to work.
Solicitor's Office Case Note Summaries
By Linda Moncys Isacson & Scott A. Chambers
In-depth version of case notes are available from Scott or Linda by e-mail or phone at 305-9035. Full text versions of the cases are available on the Internet at http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDCTS/
To Satisfy Written Description Requirement All Limitations Must Necessarily Be Described: In Hyatt v. Boone, _F.3d_, 47 USPQ2d 1128 (Fed. Cir. 1998), the Federal Circuit affirmed, with modification, an interference decision of the Board entering judgment against both Hyatt and Boone. The count in the interference was directed to a computer on a single integrated chip. The Board granted Boone an effective filing date of July 19, 1971. The Board granted Hyatt an effective filing date of December 14, 1977, but Hyatt tried to claim priority based on an application filed on December 28, 1970. The Board denied Hyatt's claim to the 1970 application because it did not have an adequate written description of the "program means" limitation as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112. The Board found that "program means" was used to describe "only computer instructions or as a modifier of 'program control means,' and [did] not describe or require the interpretation that the program processes the operands stored by the alterable memory in accordance with instructions stored in the read only memory, as [was] required by the count." The court affirmed the Board's finding, holding that even though known details need not be included in a patent specification, "the written description must include all of the limitations of the interference count, or the applicant must show that any absent text is necessarily comprehended in the description provided and would have been so understood at the time the patent application was filed." Because the earlier application did not necessarily include the interpretation required to meet the count, Hyatt had not established that he had possession of all of the limitations of the count as of December 28, 1970.
Hyatt also challenged Boone's priority date of 1971 on the basis of technical deficiencies in the chain of applications. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board's decision awarding Boone the 1971 date, noting: (1) the PTO had never raised these deficiencies, (2) routine administrative procedure was presumed, and (3) any departure from routine procedure was not grounds for collateral attack. The court also cautioned: "Courts should not readily intervene in the day-to-day operations of an administrative agency, especially when the agency practice is in straightforward implementation of the statute."
Finally, the Board entered judgment against Boone on the basis that Boone had applied for a Statutory Invention Registration (SIR) under 35 U.S.C. § 157, which requires an inventor to forego the grant of a patent but preserves the opportunity to contest priority through interference proceedings. Boone cross-appealed, arguing it was entitled to a decision on patentability and priority. The court affirmed the Board's refusal to determine patentability, but directed the Board to enter a judgment of priority in favor of Boone.
More Controversy About The Doctrine of Equivalents: The Federal Circuit denied a petition for rehearing and a suggestion for rehearing in banc for Litton Systems v. Honeywell Inc., _F.3d_, 47 USPQ2d 1106 (Fed. Cir. 1998). The original case, Litton Systems v. Honeywell Inc., 140 F.3d 1449, 46 USPQ2d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 1998), was remanded to the Federal Circuit from the Supreme Court in light of its decision in Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chem. Co., 117 S.Ct. 1040 (1997). On remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit determined that Litton amended its claims for patentability reasons. Rather than applying prosecution history estoppel to bar application of the doctrine of equivalents on appeal, the Federal Circuit remanded the case to district court for factual determinations related to whether one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude that Litton surrendered the subject matter at issue. Litton filed a petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc.
There were three dissents from the denial to rehear the case in banc. Judge Gajarsa dissented, insisting that the Supreme Court had greatly narrowed the doctrine of equivalents by "explaining that where no reason was established for the amendment, prosecution history estoppel is applied as if there were a patentability reason for a change, thereby barring all application of the doctrine of equivalents as to that element." Accordingly, when the reason for the amendment was due to patentability, application of the doctrine of equivalents for that element was per se barred. Similarly, Judge Clevenger stated that explicit language in the Supreme Court's Warner-Jenkinson opinion states that "when a limitation in a claim is amended for patentability reasons (or presumed to be amended for that reason in the absence of another explanation) the doctrine of equivalents is not available for assertion with respect to the limitation." Judge Plager indicated that the Federal Circuit should not have declined to address the extent of estoppel in banc, because the Supreme Court had "charged the Federal Circuit with the responsibility to 'refine the formulation of the test for equivalence in the orderly course of case-by-case determinations.'"
Filing separate views on the suggestion for rehearing, Judge Newman argued that "every patent practitioner knows how rare it is to conclude patent examination with claims that have not undergone amendment during prosecution, based on the examiner's rejections on grounds of patentability." According to Judge Newman, adopting Judges' Gajarsa's and Clevenger's viewpoint would upset the "historic custom and culture of patent soliciting, wherein applicants present claims of varying scope and then work out the coverage in interactions with the examiner" and would also upset "the scope of countless patents prosecuted and issued under those customs." In Judge Newman's view, such a radical change should not be attempted unless the Supreme Court issued a case that required such a departure from past practices.
Determination of Structural Equivalents Under 112 ¶ 6 Requires an Insubstantial Difference: In Chiuminatta Concrete Concepts, Inc. v. Cardinal Indus., ___ F.3d ___, 46 USPQ2d 1752 (Fed. Cir. 1998), the Federal Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment of infringement of Chiuminatta's apparatus claims because the district court erroneously construed a means-plus-function limitation too broadly. The apparatus claims were directed to a rotary saw for cutting green concrete which included a "means for supporting the surface of the concrete adjacent the leading edge of the cutting blade to inhibit chipping, spalling, or cracking of the concrete surface during cutting." The specification disclosed only one structure corresponding to the means -- a flat skid plate with a slot for the blade. The accused device had two small wheels mounted adjacent to the saw blade which support the surface of the concrete and prevent chipping during cutting. The district court held that the support means limitation included any "support surface" and, therefore, literally read on the wheels of the accused device.
As an initial matter, the Federal Circuit held that determination of the claimed function and the "means term" in a means-plus-function limitation, including corresponding structure, is a matter of claim interpretation and thus also a matter of law reviewable de novo. The court did not resolve the question of whether a determination of equivalents under 112, ¶ 6 was a question of law or fact, however. The Federal Circuit looked to the specification and identified the skid plate as the structure performing the "support function." The skid plate was disclosed as a generally flat had plate straddling the leading edge of the cutting blade. The court stated that "[t]he proper test [to determine structural equivalency] is whether the differences between the structure in the accused device and any disclosed in the specification are insubstantial." The Federal Circuit then determined that the wheels in the accused device were substantially different from the skid plate because the wheels supported the surface by rolling over the concrete and were compressible and round while the skid plate skidded across the concrete surface and was hard and predominantly flat. Therefore, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's determination that the wheels were structurally equivalent to the skid plate. The Federal Circuit further noted that, in a case where the equivalence issue does not involve later-developed technologies, but rather involves technology that predates the invention (such as the wheels in this case), a finding of non-equivalence for 112, ¶ 6 purposes should preclude a contrary finding under the doctrine of equivalents. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit reversed summary judgment of infringement of the apparatus claims.
The district court's grant of summary judgment of infringement of method
claims of a corresponding patent was affirmed.
Thereby Hangs a Tale
By Allen Flanigan
When your car was towed and you had to pay to retrieve it, did the thought occur to you that you were paying a ransom to rescue it, like bailing someone out of jail? Did you hum a sad, gallows lament like Roddy McCorley, Kevin Barry, or Gallows Pole on your way to the impound lot? If so, you are too clever by half.
The device which took your car away is formally known as a wrecker (please don't call it a "tow truck"; any old vehicle with a hitch can pull things around). It was originally designed to recover and tow vehicles that left the road under various circumstances, such as crashes. In cities nowadays, they are increasingly employed to tow illegally parked cars.
Ernest Holmes invented the modern wrecker truck in 1916 by adding a hoist to the back of a Cadillac touring car frame. Like most inventions of the 20th century, Holmes assembled existing elements into a new combination. Hoisting cranes or "derricks" were not new, having been employed for stacking hay, as davits for lowering lifeboats, unloading cargo from vessels, and so on. His essential contribution is the idea that, instead of placing temporary running gear (wheels or a dolly) under a wreck and towing it, a hoisting apparatus could be hooked to the vehicle, and it could then be towed on its remaining functional wheels to the service station. Note also the drawbar feature, which keeps the recovered vehicle from oscillating on the hook as the wrecker accelerates.
Holmes received his first of several patents in 1918. Interestingly, Holmes refers to his device as a "vehicle derrick". A synonym for "crane", derrick at one time was a common term in England for gallows. According to Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, Derrick was the name of the hangman who performed executions at the Tyburn prison in London around the 17th century. He apparently lasted long enough in the job that his name became associated with the primary tool of his trade. His most famous victim was Robert Devereux, the 2nd Earl of Essex, who was beheaded for treason in 1601. Devereux was once a favorite of the court of Queen Elizabeth I, but fell out of favor after signing a truce with the Irish and arguing with the Queen's advisors over policy. He attempted to have unfriendly councilors banished, but failed. One website author who subscribes to the "Shakespeare was really Francis Bacon" theory believes that both Bacon and Devereux were the illegitimate, unacknowledged offspring of the never married "Virgin Queen".
Getting back to the present, the invention of Ernest Holmes is honored in all its glory at the International Towing and Recovery Hall of Fame and Museum in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The museum was established by the "Friends of Towing" organization in 1995, and is located blocks from the former site of Holmes' manufacturing facility. It features antique wreckers dating back to 1916, and even boasts a Hall of Fame.
So the next time you try using this fascinating bit of trivia at a
Georgetown cocktail party in a futile attempt to dazzle a member of the opposite sex,
don't forget about your car being parked in a "no parking after 10PM" zone, or
you may be trying it out on the guy who runs the impound lot in an even more futile
attempt to persuade him to take a check.
The PTO Celebrates Asian Pacific American Heritage Month
By Luanne Din
PTO's Asian Pacific American Employment Subcommittee celebrated the
National Asian Pacific American (APA) Heritage Month during the month of May. The 1998
theme of the month was: "Pursuing Progress." This year's theme provides an
important opportunity to renew our commitment to diversity in the PTO workforce. In the
spirit of pursuing progress, the APA Subcommittee packed the month with cultural
activities, educational lectures and informative panel discussions. The Heritage Month
celebration concluded with the commemorative flagship event that featured Congressman Jim
Moran of Virginia and Commissioner Bruce Lehman.
The APA Heritage Month kicked-off with the Tai Chi demonstration held on May 5th at the PTO Fitness Center. Mr. Wah Lee, an employee of USDA, and a Tai Chi instructor in Maryland, provided an impressive demonstration and an informative motivational lecture on Tai Chi. As Mr. Lee pointed out, Tai Chi is the supreme form of all martial arts. It is used as a great exercise for self control and self discipline. Practicing and mastering gives greater self-confident. The focal point of the exercise is to learn one's inner balance through "Chi." Due to the overwhelming demand, Mr. Lee has been invited to the Community Day for another demonstration in August.
The second APA event was held on May 12th, 1998. The program, Career Pathways at PTO, was presented to a packed house. Featured guest speakers were Richard Fisher, Director of TC 1700; Al Smith, Director of TC 3600; and Elizabeth Weimar, Patent Judge on the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. Gerald Goldberg, Director of TC 2700, was the moderator. Speakers addressed the possible career development paths at the PTO in the technical, management, and legal areas. Valuable insights and advice were shared from all perspectives to give a foundation and a clear direction for an employee's career at the PTO.
May 19th was a colorful cultural affair - a program about Oriental Writing and Native Costumes. There were four different Asian countries represented and each representative wore a native costume. Representing Korea was Dr. Gyounghyun Bae who is a new examiner from TC 3700; India was Jyothsna VanKat who is a primary examiner at the Patent Reengineering Lab; Japan was Chie Kearney, a native of Japan and Alisa Rolle, a former college student in Japan; Vietnam was Ho-Ngoc Nguyen from PCT Legal Department. Participants were able to speak and write "Welcome" in all four languages. It was truly an educational experience for all. The PTO of Tomorrow took place on May 20th at the Patent Theater. The panel discussion featured Mr. Herbert Wamsley, Mr. Nicholas Godici, Ms. Gloria Gutiérrez, Mr. Frederick Schmidt, and Mr. Don Kelly. Mr. Wamsley, Executive Director of Intellectual Property Owners, touched on the global issues of intellectual property law and his view of the PTO from a customer's perspective. Mr. Godici, Acting Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Patents, talked about the five-patent goals of the PTO. Ms. Gutiérrez discussed the new hiring effort(s) at the PTO and the impact of an expanding workforce in the new millennium. Mr. Schmidt emphasized the importance of automation and the efforts that are ongoing at the PTO. Mr. Kelly, Director of TC 3700, was the moderator who kept the interest of the audience alive with his comic relief. He encouraged us to get out of our immediate "comfort zone" and take the risk in making positive changes toward improving our lives at the PTO.
The final event featured Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia as the keynote speaker. He spoke on the history of immigration and what impact it has had on the diversity of our workforce and the existence of a "glass ceiling" for the APAs in the workplace. His comments inspired us to look beyond skin color and race; let go of our fear of the unknown; respect differences; and contribute in our own unique ways.
During the closing event, Commissioner Bruce Lehman shared with the
audience that the PTO is one of the most diverse agencies within the Federal Government.
Mr. Jin Ng, Director of TC 2700, gave the closing remarks.
The Office of Petitions
By James Bryant
The Office of Petitions (Petitions) provides information about patents and enforces procedural policy that pertains to patent statutes and regulations. It also settles disputes between patent applicants and PTO representatives. Administratively, Petitions is under Steve Kunin, the Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Patent Policy and Projects.
How does Petitions enforce procedural policy that pertains to patent statues and regulations? The Office has the authority to settle disputes related to patent applications between the public and PTO representatives. As an enforcer of patent statues and regulations, Petitions has the authority to decide certain requests for supervisory review and whether a patent rule can be suspended. It also can respond to matters that are not specifically provided for by existing patent regulations. The Office has rendered decisions on approximately 10,000 decisions within a fiscal year. The office is comprised of Legal Document Review Clerks, Legal Instrument Examiners, Paralegal Specialists, Primary Examiners on detail to Petitions, and managers. Assistance is also provided by the Special Program Law Office (SPLO).
Abe Hershkovitz is the Director of the Office of Petitions. He works closely with Manny Antonakas, the Director of Patent Policy Dissemination, and Steve Kunin to ensure that petition decisions rendered reflect office policy. James Bryant is the Special Assistant to the Director of Petitions and oversees the support staff. James is also responsible for drafting responses to correspondence directed to the Commissioner. Brian Hearn is the Special Projects Examiner. Brian prepares decisions on the most complex petitions and reviews the work of the Primary Examiners serving on detail to Petitions. The managers of Petitions may also represent the PTO to explain U.S. patent law and PTO policies and procedures in letters, telephone calls, lectures and other contacts with members of the public and the patent bar.
How does Petitions provide information about the patent process to the public? It furnishes general and technical patent information to the public through its competent staff and the Patent Assistance Center (PAC). The PAC is a center where the public may call to receive answers to questions that they might have about filing a patent or resolving patent application issues. When the public calls the PAC, questions have been answered by detailed Primary Examiners from various Patent Technology Centers within the Patent and Trademark Office. During the month of June 1998, the PAC responded to over 2,300 telephone calls. Thus, Petitions is becoming an informational resource office within the Patent and Trademark Office that supplies patent information via the telephone to a growing customer base. Randy Green, Jewell Christian, and Mike Masinick work as a team to ensure that the PAC operates smoothly to meet the increasing demand of the public for guidance on patent-related issues.
The Office receives a wide variety of correspondence and calls concerning complex issues regarding petitionable matters and other issues from customers. The Legal Document Review Clerks (LDRCs), Andrea Coram and Joy Dozier, order and match papers with files, properly key-in patent application data entries into the Patent Application Locating Monitoring (PALM) system as well as forward petitions to other staff members for decision. The LDRCs also offer friendly customer service by forwarding incoming calls to staff members who can provide possible solutions or provide additional information regarding a caller's concerns.
The matters handled by Petitions include a myriad of issues. For instance, it handles issues such as permitting a filing when an inventor refuses to sign or cannot be reached, obtaining or correcting a filing date, reviving abandoned applications or lapsed patents, recognizing a priority claim after issuance of a patent, reinstating expired patents for failure to pay maintenance fees, and certain matters relating to reexamining proceedings.
The Legal Instrument Examiners (Angie Yilmaz, Janice Ford, JoAnne Burke, Latrice Bond, and Valerie Bell, under the tutelage of Stacy Hoffman, the Lead Legal Instrument Examiner) are charged with the responsibility of analyzing certain types of legal documents and supporting materials for completeness of information and compliance with selected portions of applicable regulations and procedures. Some of the Legal Instrument Examiners (LIEs) have the authority to independently prepare draft decisions on certain petitions assign to their area of operation. The Paralegal Specialists (Frances Hicks, Sherry Brinkley, Karen Creasy, and Marianne Morgan) assist in the review of certain decisions rendered by the LIEs. Using the guidelines of patent statues and regulations, the MPEP, and prior court and agency decisions, the Paralegal Specialists also make recommendations to the Director of Petitions and Steve Kunin concerning decisions for petitions under review.
Petitions, therefore, is a one-stop-shop for seeking answers to patent
questions and technical concerns. Please feel free to telephone Petitions at 305-9285, and
the PAC at 308-HELP.
Gloria Gutierrez Receives Lambda Award
By David Fox
At the 1998 EEO Awards Ceremony, Lambda PTO, the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered employee support group, presented Gloria Gutierrez, the Administrator for Human Resources and Public Affairs, the Lambda Award. The Lambda Award is presented to individuals who have made a particular contribution towards making the PTO a safe work environment for all employees regardless of sexual orientation.
Ms. Gutierrez provided unwavering support during the past year to Lambda PTO as Lambda members worked towards the establishment of an Office of Civil Rights-based subcommittee that would address issues relating to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered PTO employees.
Thanks to the efforts of several Lambda members and the support of Ms.
Gutierrez, such a subcommittee was established in March 1998, culminating in the first
annual Gay Awareness Month in June.
Kudos Given to Kids and Chemistry Program Volunteers
By Anita Alanko, Thomas Beach, and Maria Nuzzolillo
The Patent and Trademark Office's (PTO) Kids and Chemistry Program recently recognized its volunteers with certificates and kudos for providing local area fifth graders with hands-on science experience. Also, during the recognition ceremony, Dr. Cheryl Marks from the American Chemical Society; Mr. Don Kelly, Director, Technology Center 3700; and Mr. Barry Sprague from Park View Elementary School were recognized for the support that they gave to the program.
Over 90 PTO Kids and Chemistry Program volunteers visited local schools to perform hands-on experiments such as "Jiggle Jelly," "Yeast Beasts," "Mystery Powders," and "What's in a Color." Participants visited the following schools: Bunker Hill Elementary, Park View Elementary, Van Ness Elementary, Gage Eckington Elementary, Key Elementary, Amidon Elementary, and Oakridge Elementary.
Kids and Chemistry Volunteers also participated in local Science Fairs and the PTO's "Bring your Kids to Work Day." If you are interested in joining this outreach program, a fall kick-off program is being planned. During the kick-off, new and returning volunteers will be invited to join. Let's continue to introduce children to the interesting and exciting world of science.
The PTO Kids and Chemistry Program would like to thank all of the
volunteers who helped to make the 1997-1998 school year program a success.
Employee Spotlight
James Cranson, a patent classifier in Technology Center 2700, has
been with the PTO for 25 years. He is currently a Post Classifier and Project Leader for
patent reclassification in the electrical arts. His background allows him to handle any
classification situation with élan. Prior to becoming a classifier, James was a patent
examiner for 10 years. He is an avid environmentalist and he commutes from his home in
Baltimore to the PTO daily via mass transit. His hobbies include running and workings out
daily at the PTO Fitness Center.
Robert (Bob) Pezzuto, a patent examiner in Technology Center
3600, has been with the PTO for 5 years. He examines the planting, earthworking, and
excavating arts. He is originally from the Tidewater area and is married to Helen Pezzuto,
an examiner in Technology Center 1700. The Pezzuto's are expecting their first child in
September. Bob is an avid car enthusiast and also enjoys golf, skiing and working out at
the PTO Fitness Center.
By Frederick R. Schmidt
On June 9 and 11, 1998 Patent Business employees were invited to the Crystal City Forum theater for Patent Automation: Prologue and Perspective, a briefing on Patent automation developments. Produced by Search and Information Resources Administration (SIRA), this program reviewed progress in Patent automation projects and gave the audience a preview of upcoming information technology initiatives. Just as in the development of Patent automation projects, members of SIRA joined with representatives from the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) to provide presentations that were both informative and authoritative. Patent Automation: Prologue and Perspective was characterized by state of the art audiovisual and computer graphic support created by Pam Rinehart and Keith Furman. All the presentations, as well as background information on all the speakers, are posted for review on the Patents Intranet: ptoweb1/patents/ and the PTONet Exchange Public Folders.
Over 2500 attendees heard featured speakers Nick Godici, Acting Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Patents, and Dennis Shaw, Chief Information Officer, express their endorsement and commitment for continued development of automated tools to support the work of Patent Business employees. Nick emphasized how information technology supports the achievement of all five of the Patent Business goals. Dennis described his efforts to provide automation support to all business areas of the PTO. SIRA Administrator Fred Schmidt discussed how SIRA functions as a "bridge" between the Patent Business and the OCIO, ensuring that the interests of Patent employees are represented in automation development.
Three areas were presented in the Prologue and Perspective program: Search Tools, the Electronic Workplace, and Communications and Support. Kay Melvin, who leads all Patent automation development efforts for SIRA, gave an overview of each of these areas. James Thompson described the evolution in hardware provided to the Patent examining and Technical Support Staffs. A preview was given of the delivery of new 400Mz Pentium desktop workstations, glare guards and ergonomic keyboards for employees later this summer. The roll out of bar code readers to all examiners, enabling PALM transactions on each examiner's workstation, was also forecast. Ted Parr reviewed the significant progress made in the development of automated search tools, focusing on Image Search and Retrieval (IS&R) and the upcoming Global Patents Web 2.0 (GPI Web 2.0). The development of two comprehensive search tools was described by Brooks Hunt. These tools, EAST - for Examiner's Automated Search Tool and WEST - for Web-based Examiner Search Tool, will ultimately provide two avenues for text and image access to a consolidated set of both US and foreign patent information. EAST, relying on a high performance, command line interface, will be the tool of choice for heavy-duty class/subclass searching. WEST, utilizing a Web browser interface, will be adaptable to demonstrate the latest automated searching features. Dorothy Raduazzo announced the FY 99 plans for the replacement of the Messenger text search engine with the improved functionalities of BRS search. Dorothy also heralded the upcoming deployment of Derwent's World Patent Index; a premier database of value added foreign patent information, in August 1998.
Jeff Cochran began the "Electronic Workplace" segment of the program with a discussion of the Patent Image Capture System (PICS). For over a year PICS has been capturing the images of every patent application filed, and creating a database of these images to facilitate the creation of certified copies as well as operations in License and Review. The Application Capture and Review System (ACRS) will add optical character recognition of PICS images and provide electronic preliminary application classification and routing to Technology Centers, automatic first level security screening, electronic feed of data for creation of filing receipts and ultimately, automated pre-examination formalities review. The TEAM project, Tools for Electronic Application Management, was outlined by Bob Olszewski. This ambitious project will provide simultaneous access for multiple users to an electronic file wrapper. Benefits for both examiners and the Technical Support Staff, such as automatic claim diagramming and automated fee calculation and amendment entry, were highlighted. A prototype of TEAM is slated for testing in one Technology Center late in FY 99. Enhancements in our PALM system such as the migration to an open system client server based operation, were shared by Dave Talbott. Dave also described the Patent Application Information Retrieval system that will permit applicants to access information on their patent applications via the Internet, thus reducing status inquiry telephone calls to Patent Business members. Keith Tucker reviewed the critical components of secure electronic transmissions, and described current PTONet security features of PICS and Internet security enhancements for the electronic filing of patent applications.
The critical functions of the Help Desk led off the final segment of the program. Randy Bender emphasized the importance of calling 305-9000 to report automation problems and service requests. Improvements in contractor support for group printers, as well as call system enhancements to improve tracking and follow through of service requests were outlined. Rich Stouffer described activities such as focus sessions and telephone surveys that are used to solicit Patent Business members' input for and feedback on, automation tool development. Angie Sykes reviewed the various approaches utilized in providing training on the use of new automation features. Classroom training, computer-based training (CBT), paper manuals and online help are some of the techniques currently offered. The Information Technology Resource Provider program (ITRP) was explained by Michele Crecca. Activities such as Technology Center customized training, specialized examiner tutorials and on the spot trouble shooting are some of the features of this popular program.
Patent Automation: Prologue and Perspective emphasized the
fundamental changes, challenges and opportunities that patent automation will present to
all members of the Patent Business.
TM.III INTRODUCED AT ALL EMPLOYEE MEETING
What are the Trademark Office Goals? What is Flexiplace? What happens in Trademark Services Division? Who do I go to with a computer problem? How are new examining attorneys and support staff being trained? These questions and more were answered on May 28, 1998 at the Trademark All Employee meeting. The focus of this meeting was to introduce the theme of TM.III. TM.III represents moving into the future with a focus on:
Produced by employees for employees, the meeting featured exhibit booths containing information about current projects, initiatives, and processing activities in different parts of the Trademark organization. Employees were encouraged to visit each booth and ask questions about what they saw. One participant said, "This is the best all employees meeting we have ever had!"
Beverly Flanagan Receives National Intellectual Property Award
Beverly Flanagan, a primary examiner in Technology Center 3700,
recently received the 1998 Jan Jancin National Award for the Outstanding Intellectual
Property Law Student. As the national winner, Beverly received a$1,500 cash award at the
ABA Section summer conference which was held in Williamsburg, VA.
The award, given for the first time this year, is jointly sponsored by the American Bar Association and the National Council of Intellectual Property Law Associations. Intellectual property professors at the University of Baltimore unanimously recommended Beverly for the award, which is based on nominations from law school deans. The criteria used to select eligible candidates include scholastic achievement and student leadership in law school activities. Beverly's credentials included being the Editor-in-Chief of the University of Baltimore School of Law's Intellectual Property Law Journal for the school year 1997-1998 and she had an outstanding law school academic record.
Harold Pyon Appointed to VCU's Board of
Visitors
The PTO congratulates Harold Pyon, a patent examiner in
Technology Center 1700, for being appointed, in early July, to the Virginia Commonwealth
University (VCU) Board of Visitors by Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore. Pyon is a graduate of
VCU. Presently, Pyon is the chair of the PTO's Asian Pacific
American Employment Program and is also involved in several civic, charitable, and
business activities. All of us at the PTO are proud of Pyon's
recent appointment.
PTO Pulse Info Line!!
. . .Planning is well underway for the Patent and Trademark
Office's annual Hispanic Heritage Month Observance. The observance is scheduled for
September 15 through October 15, 1998. This year's theme is "Hispanic
Women." Make plans today to see the video entitled Imagenero. Join the
festivities! Experience Latin dancing and learn more about the Federal Government's
Nine Point Plan at scheduled workshops. For more information go to Shared Folders on
PTONet. . . Electronic deployment of Microsoft Office 97 started in July 1998. Full
deployment will take about three months to complete. Approximately 4,000 PTO workstations
will be upgraded. All new machines installed will be deployed with Office 97 as part of
the Enterprise Baseline. . Lou Perkins has been selected as the new Deputy Director of
the Office of Civil Rights. Congratulations Lou on your new appointment. . .Michele
Crecca is now a Patent Examiner in Technology Center 2700. Prior to becoming a Patent
Examiner, Michele worked in the Electronic Information Center of the Scientific and
Technical Information Center (STIC) in Crystal Park 2 as the Team Leader. Congratulations
Michelle . . . The classrooms of the Patent Academy have been named to honor a variety
of people who have made important contributions to the U.S. patent system. At the
entrance of each room is a brief biography and a page from the inventor's patent. When you
visit the Patent Academy, please take time to read the brief biographies. . . . . .
Join the Celebration!
August Is National Inventors' Month