Revision of Patent Fees for Fiscal Year 2012, 37296-37300 [2011-16001]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37296
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 123 / Monday, June 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
*
*
*
Dated: June 16, 2011.
Mark S. Ogle,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Hampton Roads.
[FR Doc. 2011–15971 Filed 6–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark
Office
37 CFR Parts 1 and 41
[PTO–C–2010–0019]
RIN 0651–AC44
Revision of Patent Fees for Fiscal Year
2012
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (Office) is proposing
to adjust certain patent fee amounts for
fiscal year 2012 to reflect fluctuations in
the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The
patent statute provides for the annual
CPI adjustment of patent fees set by
statute to recover the higher costs
associated with doing business.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before July 27, 2011. No
public hearing will be held.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN number RIN 0651–
AC44, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail:
Walter.Schlueter@uspto.gov. Include
RIN number RIN 0651–AC44 in the
subject line of the message.
• Fax: (571) 273–6299, marked to the
attention of Walter Schlueter.
• Mail: Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450,
marked to the attention of Walter
Schlueter.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
for this proposed rule making. For
additional information on the rule
making process, see the heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Walter Schlueter by e-mail at
Walter.Schlueter@uspto.gov, by
telephone at (571) 272–6299, or by fax
at (571) 273–6299.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:26 Jun 24, 2011
The
USPTO is proposing to adjust certain
patent fees in accordance with the
applicable provisions of title 35, United
States Code, as amended by the
Consolidated Appropriations Act (Pub.
L. 108–447, 118 Stat. 2809 (2004)).
Background: Statutory Provisions:
Patent fees are set by or under the
authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119,
120, 132(b), 156, 157(a), 255, 302, 311,
376, section 532(a)(2) of the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act (URAA) (Pub. L.
103–465, § 532(a)(2), 108 Stat. 4809,
4985 (1994)), and section 4506 of the
American Inventors Protection Act of
1999 (AIPA) (Pub. L. 106–113, 113 Stat.
1501, 1501A–565 (1999)). For fees paid
under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) and
132(b), independent inventors, small
business concerns, and nonprofit
organizations who meet the
requirements of 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1) are
entitled to a fifty-percent reduction.
Section 41(f) of title 35, United States
Code, provides that fees established
under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) may be
adjusted on October 1, 1992, and every
year thereafter, to reflect fluctuations in
the CPI over the previous twelve
months.
Section 41(g) of title 35, United States
Code, provides that new fee amounts
established by the Director under 35
U.S.C. 41 may take effect thirty days
after notice in the Federal Register and
the Official Gazette of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
The fiscal year 2005 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (section 801 of
Division B) provided that 35 U.S.C.
41(a), (b), and (d) shall be administered
in a manner that revises patent
application fees (35 U.S.C. 41(a)) and
patent maintenance fees (35 U.S.C.
41(b)), and provides for a separate filing
fee (35 U.S.C. 41(a)), search fee (35
U.S.C. 41(d)(1)), and examination fee
(35 U.S.C. 41(a)(3)) during fiscal years
2005 and 2006. See Pub. L. 108–447,
118 Stat. 2809, 2924–30 (2004). The
patent and trademark fee provisions of
the fiscal year 2005 Consolidated
Appropriations Act have been extended
through September 30, 2011, via the
Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009. See
Pub. L. 112–4, 125 Stat. 6 (2011); Pub.
L. 111–322, 124 Stat. 3518 (2010); Pub.
L. 111–317, 124 Stat. 3454 (2010); Pub.
L. 111–290, 124 Stat. 3063 (2010); Pub.
L. 111–242, 124 Stat. 2607 (2010); Pub.
L. 111–224, 124 Stat. 2385 (2010); Pub.
L. 111–117, 123 Stat. 3034 (2009); Pub.
L. 111–8, 123 Stat. 524 (2009); Pub. L.
111–6, 123 Stat. 522 (2009); Pub. L.
111–5, 123 Stat. 115 (2009); Pub. L.
110–329, 122 Stat. 3574 (2008); Pub. L.
110–161, 121 Stat. 1844 (2007); Pub. L.
110–149, 121 Stat. 1819 (2007); Pub. L.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
110–137, 121 Stat. 1454 (2007); Pub. L.
110–116, 121 Stat. 1295 (2007); Pub. L.
110–92, 121 Stat. 989 (2007); Pub. L.
110–5, 121 Stat. 8 (2007); Pub. L. 109–
383, 120 Stat. 2678 (2006); Pub. L. 109–
369, 120 Stat. 2642 (2006); and Pub. L.
109–289, 120 Stat. 1257 (2006). The
USPTO anticipates the enactment of
legislation that would extend the patent
and trademark fee provisions of the
fiscal year 2005 Consolidated
Appropriations Act through fiscal year
2012.
Fee Adjustment Level: The patent
statutory fees established by 35 U.S.C.
41(a) and (b) are proposed to be adjusted
to reflect the most recent fluctuations
occurring during the twelve-month
period prior to publication of the final
rule, as measured by the Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI–U).
The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has advised that in calculating
these fluctuations, the USPTO should
use CPI–U data as determined by the
Secretary of Labor.
In accordance with previous feesetting methodology, the USPTO
proposes to adjust patent statutory fee
amounts based on the most recent
annual increase in the CPI–U, as
reported by the Secretary of Labor, at
the time the final rule is implemented.
Proposed adjusted fee amounts are not
included in this proposed rule in order
to avoid confusion that could arise from
using projected increases in the
proposed rule that may not end up
matching actual increases at the time of
the final rule. Annual increases to the
CPI–U are published monthly, and
before the final fee amounts are
published, the fee amounts may be
adjusted based on actual fluctuations in
the CPI–U. Adjusted patent statutory fee
amounts based on the most recent
annual increase in the CPI–U, as
reported by the Secretary of Labor, will
be published in a final rules notice.
The fee amounts will be rounded by
applying standard arithmetic rules so
that the amounts rounded will be
convenient to the user. Fees for other
than a small entity of $100 or more will
be rounded to the nearest $10. Fees of
less than $100 will be rounded to an
even number so that any comparable
small entity fee will be a whole number.
General Procedures: Any fee amount
that is paid on or after the effective date
of the proposed fee adjustment would
be subject to the new fees then in effect.
The amount of the fee to be paid will
be determined by the time of filing. The
time of filing will be determined either
according to the date of receipt in the
Office (37 CFR 1.6) or the date reflected
on a proper Certificate of Mailing or
E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM
27JNP1
37297
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 123 / Monday, June 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Transmission, where such a certificate
is authorized under 37 CFR 1.8. Use of
a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission
is not authorized for items that are
specifically excluded from the
provisions of 37 CFR 1.8. Items for
which a Certificate of Mailing or
Transmission under 37 CFR 1.8 is not
authorized include, for example, filing
of national and international
applications for patents. See 37 CFR
1.8(a)(2).
Patent-related correspondence
delivered by the ‘‘Express Mail Post
Office to Addressee’’ service of the
United States Postal Service (USPS) is
considered filed or received in the
USPTO on the date of deposit with the
USPS. See 37 CFR 1.10(a)(1). The date
of deposit with the USPS is shown by
the ‘‘date-in’’ on the ‘‘Express Mail’’
mailing label or other official USPS
notation.
To ensure clarity in the
implementation of the proposed new
fees, a discussion of specific sections is
set forth below.
Discussion of Specific Rules
37 CFR 1.16 National application
filing, and examination fees: Section
1.16, paragraphs (a) through (e), (h)
through (j) and (o) through (s), if revised
as proposed, would adjust fees
established therein to reflect
fluctuations in the CPI–U.
37 CFR 1.17 Patent application and
reexamination processing fees: Section
1.17, paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5), (l),
and (m), if revised as proposed, would
adjust fees established therein to reflect
fluctuations in the CPI–U.
37 CFR 1.18 Patent post allowance
(including issue) fees: Section 1.18,
paragraphs (a) through (c), if revised as
proposed, would adjust fees established
therein to reflect fluctuations in the
CPI–U.
37 CFR 1.20 Post issuance fees:
Section 1.20, paragraphs (c)(3)–(c)(4),
and (d) through (g), if revised as
proposed, would adjust fees established
therein to reflect fluctuations in the
CPI–U.
37 CFR 1.492 National stage fees:
Section 1.492, paragraphs (a), (c)(2), (d)
through (f) and (j), if revised as
proposed, would adjust fees established
therein to reflect fluctuations in the
CPI–U.
37 CFR 41.20 Fees: Section 41.20,
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3), if
revised as proposed, would adjust fees
established therein to reflect
fluctuations in the CPI–U.
Example of Fee Amount Adjustments:
Adjusted patent statutory fee amounts
based on the most recent annual
increase in the CPI–U, as reported by
the Secretary of Labor, will be published
in a final rules notice. Table 1 provides
examples of possible fee adjustments
based on the February 2010 to February
2011 annual CPI–U increase of 2.3%.
TABLE 1
37 CFR
Title
Current fee amount
Fee amount (2.3%
increase)
1.16(a)(1) ..........
1.16(a)(1) ..........
Filing of Utility Patent Application (on or after 12/8/2004) ..
Filing of Utility Patent Application (electronic filing for small
entities)(on or after 12/8/2004).
Utility Application Filing (before 12/8/2004) .........................
Filing of Design Patent Application (on or after 12/8/2004)
Filing of Design Patent Application (CPA) (on or after 12/
8/2004).
Design Application Filing (before 12/8/2004) ......................
Design Application Filing (CPA) (before 12/8/2004) ...........
Filing of Plant Patent Application (on or after 12/8/2004) ...
Plant Application Filing (before 12/8/2004) .........................
Provisional Application Filing ...............................................
Filing of Reissue Patent Application (on or after 12/8/
2004).
Filing of Reissue Patent Application (CPA) (on or after 12/
8/2004).
Reissue Application Filing (before 12/8/2004) ....................
Reissue Application Filing (CPA) (before 12/8/2004) .........
Independent Claims in Excess of Three .............................
Reissue Independent Claims in Excess of Three ...............
Claims in Excess of Twenty ................................................
Reissue Total Claims in Excess of Twenty .........................
Multiple Dependent Claims ..................................................
Utility Patent Examination ....................................................
Design Patent Examination .................................................
Plant Patent Examination ....................................................
Reissue Patent Examination ...............................................
Utility Application Size Fee—For each additional 50
sheets that exceeds 100 sheets.
Design Application Size Fee—For each additional 50
sheets that exceeds 100 sheets.
Plant Application Size Fee—For each additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100 sheets.
Reissue Application Size Fee—For each additional 50
sheets that exceeds 100 sheets.
Provisional Application Size Fee—For each additional 50
sheets that exceeds 100 sheets.
Extension for Response within First Month .........................
Extension for Response within Second Month ...................
Extension for Response within Third Month .......................
Extension for Response within Fourth Month .....................
Extension for Response within Fifth Month .........................
Petition to Revive Unavoidably Abandoned Application .....
$330, (SE) $165 ....
$82 .........................
$340, (SE) $170 ....
$84 .........................
$10, (SE) $5.
$2.
$850, (SE) $425 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$870, (SE) $435 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$20, (SE) $10.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$380,
$380,
$220,
$600,
$220,
$330,
$390,
$390,
$230,
$610,
$230,
$340,
$10,
$10,
$10,
$10,
$10,
$10,
1.16(a)(2) ..........
1.16(b)(1) ..........
1.16(b)(1) ..........
1.16(b)(2) ..........
1.16(b)(2) ..........
1.16(c)(1) ..........
1.16(c)(2) ..........
1.16(d) ..............
1.16(e)(1) ..........
1.16(e)(1) ..........
1.16(e)(2) ..........
1.16(e)(2) ..........
1.16(h) ..............
1.16(h) ..............
1.16(i) ...............
1.16(i) ...............
1.16(j) ...............
1.16(o) ..............
1.16(p) ..............
1.16(q) ..............
1.16(r) ...............
1.16(s) ..............
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
1.16(s) ..............
1.16(s) ..............
1.16(s) ..............
1.16(s) ..............
1.17(a)(1) ..........
1.17(a)(2) ..........
1.17(a)(3) ..........
1.17(a)(4) ..........
1.17(a)(5) ..........
1.17(l) ...............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:26 Jun 24, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
$190
$190
$110
$300
$110
$165
....
....
....
....
....
....
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
$195
$195
$115
$305
$115
$170
....
....
....
....
....
....
Fee adjustment
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
(SE)
$5.
$5.
$5.
$5.
$5.
$5.
$330, (SE) $165 ....
$340, (SE) $170 ....
$10, (SE) $5.
$850, (SE) $425 ....
$850, (SE) $425 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$390, (SE) $195 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$140, (SE) $70 ......
$170, (SE) $85 ......
$650, (SE) $325 ....
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$870, (SE) $435 ....
$870, (SE) $435 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$400, (SE) $200 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$140, (SE) $70 ......
$170, (SE) $85 ......
$660, (SE) $330 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$20, (SE) $10.
$20, (SE) $10.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$0, (SE) $0.
$0, (SE) $0.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$0, (SE) $0.
$0, (SE) $0.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$10, (SE) $5.
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$10, (SE) $5.
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$10, (SE) $5.
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$10, (SE) $5.
$130, (SE) $65 ......
$490, (SE) $245 ....
$1,110, (SE) $555
$1,730, (SE) $865
$2,350, (SE) $1,175
$540, (SE) $270 ....
$130, (SE) $65 ......
$500, (SE) $250 ....
$1,120, (SE) $560
$1,740, (SE) $870
$2,360, (SE) $1,180
$550, (SE) $275 ....
$0, (SE) $0.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM
27JNP1
37298
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 123 / Monday, June 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—Continued
37 CFR
Title
Current fee amount
Fee amount (2.3%
increase)
1.17(m) .............
1.18(a) ..............
1.18(a) ..............
1.18(b) ..............
1.18(c) ..............
1.20(c)(3) ..........
1.20(c)(4) ..........
1.20(d) ..............
1.20(e) ..............
1.20(f) ...............
1.20(g) ..............
1.492(a) ............
1.492(c)(2) ........
1.492(d) ............
1.492(e) ............
1.492(f) .............
1.492(j) .............
41.20(b)(1) ........
41.20(b)(2) ........
41.20(b)(3) ........
Petition to Revive Unintentionally Abandoned Application
Utility Issue ..........................................................................
Reissue Issue ......................................................................
Design Issue ........................................................................
Plant Issue ...........................................................................
Reexamination Independent Claims in Excess of Three ....
Reexamination Total Claims in Excess of Twenty ..............
Statutory Disclaimer .............................................................
First Stage Maintenance ......................................................
Second Stage Maintenance ................................................
Third Stage Maintenance ....................................................
Filing of PCT National Stage Application ............................
PCT National Stage Examination—All Other Situations .....
Independent Claims in Excess of Three .............................
Total Claims in Excess of Twenty .......................................
Multiple Dependent Claims ..................................................
PCT National Stage Application Size Fee ..........................
Notice of Appeal ..................................................................
Filing a Brief in Support of an Appeal .................................
Request for Oral Hearing ....................................................
$1,620, (SE) $810
$1,510, (SE) $755
$1,510, (SE) $755
$860, (SE) $430 ....
$1,190, (SE) $595
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$140, (SE) $70 ......
$980, (SE) $490 ....
$2,480, (SE) $1,240
$4,110, (SE) $2,055
$330, (SE) $165 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$220, (SE) $110 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$390, (SE) $195 ....
$270, (SE) $135 ....
$540, (SE) $270 ....
$540, (SE) $270 ....
$1,080, (SE) $540
$1,660, (SE) $830
$1,540, (SE) $770
$1,540, (SE) $770
$880, (SE) $440 ....
$1,220, (SE) $610
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$140, (SE) $70 ......
$1,000, (SE) $500
$2,540, (SE) $1,270
$4,200, (SE) $2,100
$340, (SE) $170 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$230, (SE) $115 ....
$52, (SE) $26 ........
$400, (SE) $200 ....
$280, (SE) $140 ....
$550, (SE) $275 ....
$550, (SE) $275 ....
$1,100, (SE) $550
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Rulemaking Considerations
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
1. Description of the reasons that
action by the agency is being
considered: The USPTO is proposing to
adjust the patent fees set under 35
U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) to ensure proper
funding for effective operations. The
patent fee CPI adjustment is a routine
adjustment that has generally occurred
on an annual basis when necessary to
recover the higher costs of USPTO
operations that occur due to the increase
in the price of products and services.
2. Succinct statement of the objectives
of, and legal basis for, the proposed
rules: The objective of the proposed
change is to adjust patent fees set under
35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) to recover the
higher costs of USPTO operations.
Patent fees are set by or under the
authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119,
120, 132(b), 156, 157(a), 255, 302, 311,
376, section 532(a)(2) of the URAA, and
4506 of the AIPA. 35 U.S.C. 41(f)
provides that fees established under 35
U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) may be adjusted
every year to reflect fluctuations in the
CPI over the previous twelve months.
3. Description and estimate of the
number of affected small entities: The
Small Business Administration (SBA)
small business size standards applicable
to most analyses conducted to comply
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act are
set forth in 13 CFR 121.201. These
regulations generally define small
businesses as those with fewer than a
maximum number of employees or less
than a specified level of annual receipts
for the entity’s industrial sector or North
American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) code. The USPTO,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:26 Jun 24, 2011
Jkt 223001
however, has formally adopted an
alternate size standard as the size
standard for the purpose of conducting
an analysis or making a certification
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act for
patent-related regulations. See Business
Size Standard for Purposes of United
States Patent and Trademark Office
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for
Patent-Related Regulations, 71 FR
67109 (Nov. 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz.
Pat. Office 60 (Dec. 12, 2006). This
alternate small business size standard is
the previously established size standard
that identifies the criteria entities must
meet to be entitled to pay reduced
patent fees. See 13 CFR 121.802. If
patent applicants identify themselves on
the patent application as qualifying for
reduced patent fees, the USPTO
captures this data in the Patent
Application Location and Monitoring
(PALM) database system, which tracks
information on each patent application
submitted to the USPTO.
Unlike the SBA small business size
standards set forth in 13 CFR 121.201,
this size standard is not industryspecific. Specifically, the USPTO
definition of small business concern for
Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes is a
business or other concern that: (1) Meets
the SBA’s definition of a ‘‘business
concern or concern’’ set forth in 13 CFR
121.105; and (2) meets the size
standards set forth in 13 CFR 121.802
for the purpose of paying reduced
patent fees, namely an entity: (a) whose
number of employees, including
affiliates, does not exceed 500 persons;
and (b) which has not assigned, granted,
conveyed, or licensed (and is under no
obligation to do so) any rights in the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Fee adjustment
$40, (SE) $20.
$30, (SE) $15.
$30, (SE) $15.
$20, (SE) $10.
$30, (SE) $15.
$10, (SE) $5.
$0, (SE) $0.
$0, (SE) $0.
$20, (SE) $10.
$60, (SE) $30.
$90, (SE) $45.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$0, (SE) $0.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$10, (SE) $5.
$20, (SE) $10.
invention to any person who made it
and could not be classified as an
independent inventor, or to any concern
which would not qualify as a non-profit
organization or a small business concern
under this definition. See Business Size
Standard for Purposes of United States
Patent and Trademark Office Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis for Patent-Related
Regulations, 71 FR at 67112 (November
20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office at
63 (December 12, 2006).
The changes in this proposed rule
will apply to any small entity that files
a patent application, or has a pending
patent application or unexpired patent.
The changes in this proposed rule will
specifically apply when an applicant or
patentee pays an application filing or
national stage entry fee, search fee,
examination fee, extension of time fee,
notice of appeal fee, appeal brief fee,
request for an oral hearing fee, petition
to revive fee, issue fee, or patent
maintenance fee.
The USPTO has been advised that a
number of small entity applicants and
patentees do not claim small entity
status for various reasons. See Business
Size Standard for Purposes of United
States Patent and Trademark Office
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for
Patent-Related Regulations, 71 FR at
67110 (November 20, 2006), 1313 Off.
Gaz. Pat. Office at 61 (December 12,
2006). Therefore, the USPTO is also
considering all other entities paying
patent fees as well.
4. Description of the projected
reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the
proposed rules, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities which will
E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM
27JNP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 123 / Monday, June 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
be subject to the requirement and the
type of professional skills necessary for
preparation of the report or record: This
notice does not propose any reporting,
recordkeeping and other compliance
requirements. This notice proposes only
to adjust patent fees (as discussed
previously) to reflect changes in the CPI.
5. Description of any significant
alternatives to the proposed rules which
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes and which minimize
any significant economic impact of the
proposed rules on small entities: The
alternative of not adjusting patent fees
would have a lesser economic impact on
small entities, but would not
accomplish the stated objectives of
applicable statutes. The USPTO is
proposing to adjust the patent fees to
ensure proper funding for effective
operations. The patent fee CPI
adjustment is a routine adjustment that
has generally occurred on an annual
basis to recover the higher costs of
USPTO operations that occur due to the
increase in the price of products and
services and to recover the estimated
cost to the USPTO for processing
activities and services and materials
relating to patents and trademarks,
respectively, including proportionate
shares of the administrative costs of the
USPTO. The lack of proper funding for
effective operations would result in a
significant increase in patent pendency
levels.
6. Identification, to the extent
practicable, of all relevant Federal rules
which may duplicate, overlap or conflict
with the proposed rules: The USPTO is
the sole agency of the United States
Government responsible for
administering the provisions of title 35,
United States Code, pertaining to
examination and granting patents.
Therefore, no other Federal, state, or
local entity shares jurisdiction over the
examination and granting of patents.
Other countries, however, have their
own patent laws, and an entity desiring
a patent in a particular country must
make an application for patent in that
country, in accordance with the
applicable law. Although the potential
for overlap exists internationally, this
cannot be avoided except by treaty
(such as the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property, or the
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)).
Nevertheless, the USPTO believes that
there are no other duplicative or
overlapping rules.
B. Executive Order 13132
(Federalism): This rule making does not
contain policies with federalism
implications sufficient to warrant
preparation of a Federalism Assessment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:26 Jun 24, 2011
Jkt 223001
under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4,
1999).
C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory
Planning and Review): This rule making
has been determined to be significant
for purposes of Executive Order 12866
(Sept. 30, 1993), as amended by
Executive Order 13258 (Feb. 26, 2002),
and Executive Order 13422 (Jan. 18,
2007).
D. Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review): The
Office has complied with Executive
Order 13563 (Jan. 8, 2011). Specifically,
the Office has: (1) Used the best
available techniques to quantify costs
and benefits, and has considered values
such as equity, fairness and distributive
impacts; (2) provided the public with a
meaningful opportunity to participate in
the regulatory process, including
soliciting the views of those likely
affected, by issuing this notice of
proposed rule making and providing online access to the rule making docket;
(3) attempted to promote coordination,
simplification and harmonization across
government agencies and identified
goals designed to promote innovation;
(4) considered approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and
freedom of choice for the public; and (5)
ensured the objectivity of scientific and
technological information and
processes, to the extent applicable.
E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation): This rule making will
not: (1) Have substantial direct effects
on one or more Indian tribes; (2) impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian tribal governments; or (3)
preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal
summary impact statement is not
required under Executive Order 13175
(Nov. 6, 2000).
F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy
Effects): This rule making is not a
significant energy action under
Executive Order 13211 because this rule
making is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,
a Statement of Energy Effects is not
required under Executive Order 13211
(May 18, 2001).
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil
Justice Reform): This rule making meets
applicable standards to minimize
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and
reduce burden as set forth in sections
3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order
12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).
H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection
of Children): This rule making is not an
economically significant rule and does
not concern an environmental risk to
health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children under
Executive Order 13045 (Apr. 21, 1997).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37299
I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of
Private Property): This rule making will
not effect a taking of private property or
otherwise have taking implications
under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15,
1988).
J. Congressional Review Act: Under
the Congressional Review Act
provisions of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to
issuing any final rule, the USPTO will
submit a report containing the final rule
and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives and the Comptroller
General of the Government
Accountability Office. The changes
proposed in this notice are not expected
to result in an annual effect on the
economy of 100 million dollars or more,
a major increase in costs or prices, or
significant adverse effects on
competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability
of United States-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises
in domestic and export markets.
Therefore, this rule making is not likely
to result in a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined in
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995: The changes proposed in this
notice do not involve a Federal
intergovernmental mandate that will
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or
more in any one year, or a Federal
private sector mandate that will result
in the expenditure by the private sector
of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or
more in any one year, and will not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Therefore, no actions are
necessary under the provisions of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
L. National Environmental Policy Act:
This rule making will not have any
effect on the quality of environment and
is thus categorically excluded from
review under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969. See
42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
M. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act: The requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) are
inapplicable because this rule making
does not contain provisions which
involve the use of technical standards.
N. Paperwork Reduction Act: This
proposed rule involves information
collection requirements which are
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM
27JNP1
37300
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 123 / Monday, June 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The collections of information
involved in this proposed rule have
been reviewed and approved by OMB.
The Office is not resubmitting
information collection requests to OMB
for its review and approval at this time
because the changes proposed in this
notice revise the fees for existing
information collection requirements
under OMB control numbers 0651–
0016, 0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651–
0031, 0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651–
0063 and 0651–0064. The USPTO will
submit to OMB fee revision changes for
the OMB control numbers 0651–0016,
0651–0021, 0651–0024, 0651–0031,
0651–0032, 0651–0033, 0651–0063 and
0651–0064 if the changes proposed in
this notice are adopted.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
2010, the Illinois Environmental
Protection Agency (IEPA) submitted to
EPA for approval an adjustment to the
general rule, Use of Organic Material
Rule, commonly known as the eight
pound per hour (8 lb/hr) rule, as it
applies to emissions of volatile organic
matter (VOM) from Royal’s pool
manufacturing facility. The adjusted
standard relieves Royal from being
subject to the general rule for VOM
emissions from its Dix facility. EPA is
approving this SIP revision because it
will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS).
40 CFR Part 52
Comments must be received on
or before July 27, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2010–0545, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control
Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano,
Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Final Rules section of
this Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0973; FRL–9319–3]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
List of Subjects
37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure, Courts, Freedom of
information, Inventions and patents,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
37 CFR Part 41
Administrative practice and
procedure, Inventions and patents,
Lawyers.
Dated: June 8, 2011.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2011–16001 Filed 6–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois;
Royal Fiberglass Pools, Inc. Adjusted
Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
into the Illinois State Implementation
Plan (SIP) an adjusted standard for
Royal Fiberglass Pools (‘‘Royal’’) at its
Dix, Illinois facility. On November 8,
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:26 Jun 24, 2011
Jkt 223001
DATES:
Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290,
persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the state’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA
receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the Rules section of this Federal
Register.
Dated: June 3, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011–15868 Filed 6–24–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0417; FRL–9323–3]
RIN 2060–AP99
Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases: Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems: Revisions to Best Available
Monitoring Method Provisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to amend
certain provisions related to best
available monitoring methods in
regulations for Petroleum and Natural
Gas Systems of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to extend the time period
during which owners and operators of
covered facilities would be permitted to
use best available monitoring methods
during 2011 without submitting a
request to the Administrator for
approval. In addition, EPA is proposing
to expand the list of types of emissions
sources for which owners and operators
would not be required to submit a
request to the Administrator to use best
available monitoring methods for 2011
and extend the deadline by which
owners and operators of covered
facilities would request use of best
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27JNP1.SGM
27JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 123 (Monday, June 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37296-37300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-16001]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Parts 1 and 41
[PTO-C-2010-0019]
RIN 0651-AC44
Revision of Patent Fees for Fiscal Year 2012
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is
proposing to adjust certain patent fee amounts for fiscal year 2012 to
reflect fluctuations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The patent
statute provides for the annual CPI adjustment of patent fees set by
statute to recover the higher costs associated with doing business.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 27, 2011. No
public hearing will be held.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN number RIN 0651-
AC44, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: Walter.Schlueter@uspto.gov. Include RIN number RIN
0651-AC44 in the subject line of the message.
Fax: (571) 273-6299, marked to the attention of Walter
Schlueter.
Mail: Director of the United States Patent and Trademark
Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450, marked to the
attention of Walter Schlueter.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this proposed rule making.
For additional information on the rule making process, see the heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Walter Schlueter by e-mail at
Walter.Schlueter@uspto.gov, by telephone at (571) 272-6299, or by fax
at (571) 273-6299.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USPTO is proposing to adjust certain
patent fees in accordance with the applicable provisions of title 35,
United States Code, as amended by the Consolidated Appropriations Act
(Pub. L. 108-447, 118 Stat. 2809 (2004)).
Background: Statutory Provisions: Patent fees are set by or under
the authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119, 120, 132(b), 156, 157(a),
255, 302, 311, 376, section 532(a)(2) of the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act (URAA) (Pub. L. 103-465, Sec. 532(a)(2), 108 Stat. 4809, 4985
(1994)), and section 4506 of the American Inventors Protection Act of
1999 (AIPA) (Pub. L. 106-113, 113 Stat. 1501, 1501A-565 (1999)). For
fees paid under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) and 132(b), independent
inventors, small business concerns, and nonprofit organizations who
meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1) are entitled to a fifty-
percent reduction.
Section 41(f) of title 35, United States Code, provides that fees
established under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) may be adjusted on October 1,
1992, and every year thereafter, to reflect fluctuations in the CPI
over the previous twelve months.
Section 41(g) of title 35, United States Code, provides that new
fee amounts established by the Director under 35 U.S.C. 41 may take
effect thirty days after notice in the Federal Register and the
Official Gazette of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
The fiscal year 2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act (section 801
of Division B) provided that 35 U.S.C. 41(a), (b), and (d) shall be
administered in a manner that revises patent application fees (35
U.S.C. 41(a)) and patent maintenance fees (35 U.S.C. 41(b)), and
provides for a separate filing fee (35 U.S.C. 41(a)), search fee (35
U.S.C. 41(d)(1)), and examination fee (35 U.S.C. 41(a)(3)) during
fiscal years 2005 and 2006. See Pub. L. 108-447, 118 Stat. 2809, 2924-
30 (2004). The patent and trademark fee provisions of the fiscal year
2005 Consolidated Appropriations Act have been extended through
September 30, 2011, via the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009. See Pub.
L. 112-4, 125 Stat. 6 (2011); Pub. L. 111-322, 124 Stat. 3518 (2010);
Pub. L. 111-317, 124 Stat. 3454 (2010); Pub. L. 111-290, 124 Stat. 3063
(2010); Pub. L. 111-242, 124 Stat. 2607 (2010); Pub. L. 111-224, 124
Stat. 2385 (2010); Pub. L. 111-117, 123 Stat. 3034 (2009); Pub. L. 111-
8, 123 Stat. 524 (2009); Pub. L. 111-6, 123 Stat. 522 (2009); Pub. L.
111-5, 123 Stat. 115 (2009); Pub. L. 110-329, 122 Stat. 3574 (2008);
Pub. L. 110-161, 121 Stat. 1844 (2007); Pub. L. 110-149, 121 Stat. 1819
(2007); Pub. L. 110-137, 121 Stat. 1454 (2007); Pub. L. 110-116, 121
Stat. 1295 (2007); Pub. L. 110-92, 121 Stat. 989 (2007); Pub. L. 110-5,
121 Stat. 8 (2007); Pub. L. 109-383, 120 Stat. 2678 (2006); Pub. L.
109-369, 120 Stat. 2642 (2006); and Pub. L. 109-289, 120 Stat. 1257
(2006). The USPTO anticipates the enactment of legislation that would
extend the patent and trademark fee provisions of the fiscal year 2005
Consolidated Appropriations Act through fiscal year 2012.
Fee Adjustment Level: The patent statutory fees established by 35
U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) are proposed to be adjusted to reflect the most
recent fluctuations occurring during the twelve-month period prior to
publication of the final rule, as measured by the Consumer Price Index
for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has advised that in calculating these fluctuations, the USPTO
should use CPI-U data as determined by the Secretary of Labor.
In accordance with previous fee-setting methodology, the USPTO
proposes to adjust patent statutory fee amounts based on the most
recent annual increase in the CPI-U, as reported by the Secretary of
Labor, at the time the final rule is implemented. Proposed adjusted fee
amounts are not included in this proposed rule in order to avoid
confusion that could arise from using projected increases in the
proposed rule that may not end up matching actual increases at the time
of the final rule. Annual increases to the CPI-U are published monthly,
and before the final fee amounts are published, the fee amounts may be
adjusted based on actual fluctuations in the CPI-U. Adjusted patent
statutory fee amounts based on the most recent annual increase in the
CPI-U, as reported by the Secretary of Labor, will be published in a
final rules notice.
The fee amounts will be rounded by applying standard arithmetic
rules so that the amounts rounded will be convenient to the user. Fees
for other than a small entity of $100 or more will be rounded to the
nearest $10. Fees of less than $100 will be rounded to an even number
so that any comparable small entity fee will be a whole number.
General Procedures: Any fee amount that is paid on or after the
effective date of the proposed fee adjustment would be subject to the
new fees then in effect. The amount of the fee to be paid will be
determined by the time of filing. The time of filing will be determined
either according to the date of receipt in the Office (37 CFR 1.6) or
the date reflected on a proper Certificate of Mailing or
[[Page 37297]]
Transmission, where such a certificate is authorized under 37 CFR 1.8.
Use of a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission is not authorized for
items that are specifically excluded from the provisions of 37 CFR 1.8.
Items for which a Certificate of Mailing or Transmission under 37 CFR
1.8 is not authorized include, for example, filing of national and
international applications for patents. See 37 CFR 1.8(a)(2).
Patent-related correspondence delivered by the ``Express Mail Post
Office to Addressee'' service of the United States Postal Service
(USPS) is considered filed or received in the USPTO on the date of
deposit with the USPS. See 37 CFR 1.10(a)(1). The date of deposit with
the USPS is shown by the ``date-in'' on the ``Express Mail'' mailing
label or other official USPS notation.
To ensure clarity in the implementation of the proposed new fees, a
discussion of specific sections is set forth below.
Discussion of Specific Rules
37 CFR 1.16 National application filing, and examination fees:
Section 1.16, paragraphs (a) through (e), (h) through (j) and (o)
through (s), if revised as proposed, would adjust fees established
therein to reflect fluctuations in the CPI-U.
37 CFR 1.17 Patent application and reexamination processing fees:
Section 1.17, paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5), (l), and (m), if
revised as proposed, would adjust fees established therein to reflect
fluctuations in the CPI-U.
37 CFR 1.18 Patent post allowance (including issue) fees: Section
1.18, paragraphs (a) through (c), if revised as proposed, would adjust
fees established therein to reflect fluctuations in the CPI-U.
37 CFR 1.20 Post issuance fees: Section 1.20, paragraphs (c)(3)-
(c)(4), and (d) through (g), if revised as proposed, would adjust fees
established therein to reflect fluctuations in the CPI-U.
37 CFR 1.492 National stage fees: Section 1.492, paragraphs (a),
(c)(2), (d) through (f) and (j), if revised as proposed, would adjust
fees established therein to reflect fluctuations in the CPI-U.
37 CFR 41.20 Fees: Section 41.20, paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3),
if revised as proposed, would adjust fees established therein to
reflect fluctuations in the CPI-U.
Example of Fee Amount Adjustments: Adjusted patent statutory fee
amounts based on the most recent annual increase in the CPI-U, as
reported by the Secretary of Labor, will be published in a final rules
notice. Table 1 provides examples of possible fee adjustments based on
the February 2010 to February 2011 annual CPI-U increase of 2.3%.
Table 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
37 CFR Title Current fee amount Fee amount (2.3% increase) Fee adjustment
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.16(a)(1).................. Filing of Utility $330, (SE) $165................ $340, (SE) $170................ $10, (SE) $5.
Patent Application (on
or after 12/8/2004).
1.16(a)(1).................. Filing of Utility $82............................ $84............................ $2.
Patent Application
(electronic filing for
small entities)(on or
after 12/8/2004).
1.16(a)(2).................. Utility Application $850, (SE) $425................ $870, (SE) $435................ $20, (SE) $10.
Filing (before 12/8/
2004).
1.16(b)(1).................. Filing of Design Patent $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Application (on or
after 12/8/2004).
1.16(b)(1).................. Filing of Design Patent $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Application (CPA) (on
or after 12/8/2004).
1.16(b)(2).................. Design Application $380, (SE) $190................ $390, (SE) $195................ $10, (SE) $5.
Filing (before 12/8/
2004).
1.16(b)(2).................. Design Application $380, (SE) $190................ $390, (SE) $195................ $10, (SE) $5.
Filing (CPA) (before
12/8/2004).
1.16(c)(1).................. Filing of Plant Patent $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Application (on or
after 12/8/2004).
1.16(c)(2).................. Plant Application $600, (SE) $300................ $610, (SE) $305................ $10, (SE) $5.
Filing (before 12/8/
2004).
1.16(d)..................... Provisional Application $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Filing.
1.16(e)(1).................. Filing of Reissue $330, (SE) $165................ $340, (SE) $170................ $10, (SE) $5.
Patent Application (on
or after 12/8/2004).
1.16(e)(1).................. Filing of Reissue $330, (SE) $165................ $340, (SE) $170................ $10, (SE) $5.
Patent Application
(CPA) (on or after 12/
8/2004).
1.16(e)(2).................. Reissue Application $850, (SE) $425................ $870, (SE) $435................ $20, (SE) $10.
Filing (before 12/8/
2004).
1.16(e)(2).................. Reissue Application $850, (SE) $425................ $870, (SE) $435................ $20, (SE) $10.
Filing (CPA) (before
12/8/2004).
1.16(h)..................... Independent Claims in $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Excess of Three.
1.16(h)..................... Reissue Independent $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Claims in Excess of
Three.
1.16(i)..................... Claims in Excess of $52, (SE) $26.................. $52, (SE) $26.................. $0, (SE) $0.
Twenty.
1.16(i)..................... Reissue Total Claims in $52, (SE) $26.................. $52, (SE) $26.................. $0, (SE) $0.
Excess of Twenty.
1.16(j)..................... Multiple Dependent $390, (SE) $195................ $400, (SE) $200................ $10, (SE) $5.
Claims.
1.16(o)..................... Utility Patent $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Examination.
1.16(p)..................... Design Patent $140, (SE) $70................. $140, (SE) $70................. $0, (SE) $0.
Examination.
1.16(q)..................... Plant Patent $170, (SE) $85................. $170, (SE) $85................. $0, (SE) $0.
Examination.
1.16(r)..................... Reissue Patent $650, (SE) $325................ $660, (SE) $330................ $10, (SE) $5.
Examination.
1.16(s)..................... Utility Application $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Size Fee--For each
additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100
sheets.
1.16(s)..................... Design Application Size $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Fee--For each
additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100
sheets.
1.16(s)..................... Plant Application Size $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Fee--For each
additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100
sheets.
1.16(s)..................... Reissue Application $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Size Fee--For each
additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100
sheets.
1.16(s)..................... Provisional Application $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Size Fee--For each
additional 50 sheets
that exceeds 100
sheets.
1.17(a)(1).................. Extension for Response $130, (SE) $65................. $130, (SE) $65................. $0, (SE) $0.
within First Month.
1.17(a)(2).................. Extension for Response $490, (SE) $245................ $500, (SE) $250................ $10, (SE) $5.
within Second Month.
1.17(a)(3).................. Extension for Response $1,110, (SE) $555.............. $1,120, (SE) $560.............. $10, (SE) $5.
within Third Month.
1.17(a)(4).................. Extension for Response $1,730, (SE) $865.............. $1,740, (SE) $870.............. $10, (SE) $5.
within Fourth Month.
1.17(a)(5).................. Extension for Response $2,350, (SE) $1,175............ $2,360, (SE) $1,180............ $10, (SE) $5.
within Fifth Month.
1.17(l)..................... Petition to Revive $540, (SE) $270................ $550, (SE) $275................ $10, (SE) $5.
Unavoidably Abandoned
Application.
[[Page 37298]]
1.17(m)..................... Petition to Revive $1,620, (SE) $810.............. $1,660, (SE) $830.............. $40, (SE) $20.
Unintentionally
Abandoned Application.
1.18(a)..................... Utility Issue.......... $1,510, (SE) $755.............. $1,540, (SE) $770.............. $30, (SE) $15.
1.18(a)..................... Reissue Issue.......... $1,510, (SE) $755.............. $1,540, (SE) $770.............. $30, (SE) $15.
1.18(b)..................... Design Issue........... $860, (SE) $430................ $880, (SE) $440................ $20, (SE) $10.
1.18(c)..................... Plant Issue............ $1,190, (SE) $595.............. $1,220, (SE) $610.............. $30, (SE) $15.
1.20(c)(3).................. Reexamination $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Independent Claims in
Excess of Three.
1.20(c)(4).................. Reexamination Total $52, (SE) $26.................. $52, (SE) $26.................. $0, (SE) $0.
Claims in Excess of
Twenty.
1.20(d)..................... Statutory Disclaimer... $140, (SE) $70................. $140, (SE) $70................. $0, (SE) $0.
1.20(e)..................... First Stage Maintenance $980, (SE) $490................ $1,000, (SE) $500.............. $20, (SE) $10.
1.20(f)..................... Second Stage $2,480, (SE) $1,240............ $2,540, (SE) $1,270............ $60, (SE) $30.
Maintenance.
1.20(g)..................... Third Stage Maintenance $4,110, (SE) $2,055............ $4,200, (SE) $2,100............ $90, (SE) $45.
1.492(a).................... Filing of PCT National $330, (SE) $165................ $340, (SE) $170................ $10, (SE) $5.
Stage Application.
1.492(c)(2)................. PCT National Stage $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Examination--All Other
Situations.
1.492(d).................... Independent Claims in $220, (SE) $110................ $230, (SE) $115................ $10, (SE) $5.
Excess of Three.
1.492(e).................... Total Claims in Excess $52, (SE) $26.................. $52, (SE) $26.................. $0, (SE) $0.
of Twenty.
1.492(f).................... Multiple Dependent $390, (SE) $195................ $400, (SE) $200................ $10, (SE) $5.
Claims.
1.492(j).................... PCT National Stage $270, (SE) $135................ $280, (SE) $140................ $10, (SE) $5.
Application Size Fee.
41.20(b)(1)................. Notice of Appeal....... $540, (SE) $270................ $550, (SE) $275................ $10, (SE) $5.
41.20(b)(2)................. Filing a Brief in $540, (SE) $270................ $550, (SE) $275................ $10, (SE) $5.
Support of an Appeal.
41.20(b)(3)................. Request for Oral $1,080, (SE) $540.............. $1,100, (SE) $550.............. $20, (SE) $10.
Hearing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rulemaking Considerations
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:
1. Description of the reasons that action by the agency is being
considered: The USPTO is proposing to adjust the patent fees set under
35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) to ensure proper funding for effective
operations. The patent fee CPI adjustment is a routine adjustment that
has generally occurred on an annual basis when necessary to recover the
higher costs of USPTO operations that occur due to the increase in the
price of products and services.
2. Succinct statement of the objectives of, and legal basis for,
the proposed rules: The objective of the proposed change is to adjust
patent fees set under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and (b) to recover the higher
costs of USPTO operations. Patent fees are set by or under the
authority provided in 35 U.S.C. 41, 119, 120, 132(b), 156, 157(a), 255,
302, 311, 376, section 532(a)(2) of the URAA, and 4506 of the AIPA. 35
U.S.C. 41(f) provides that fees established under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) and
(b) may be adjusted every year to reflect fluctuations in the CPI over
the previous twelve months.
3. Description and estimate of the number of affected small
entities: The Small Business Administration (SBA) small business size
standards applicable to most analyses conducted to comply with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act are set forth in 13 CFR 121.201. These
regulations generally define small businesses as those with fewer than
a maximum number of employees or less than a specified level of annual
receipts for the entity's industrial sector or North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) code. The USPTO, however, has formally
adopted an alternate size standard as the size standard for the purpose
of conducting an analysis or making a certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act for patent-related regulations. See Business
Size Standard for Purposes of United States Patent and Trademark Office
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for Patent-Related Regulations, 71 FR
67109 (Nov. 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 60 (Dec. 12, 2006).
This alternate small business size standard is the previously
established size standard that identifies the criteria entities must
meet to be entitled to pay reduced patent fees. See 13 CFR 121.802. If
patent applicants identify themselves on the patent application as
qualifying for reduced patent fees, the USPTO captures this data in the
Patent Application Location and Monitoring (PALM) database system,
which tracks information on each patent application submitted to the
USPTO.
Unlike the SBA small business size standards set forth in 13 CFR
121.201, this size standard is not industry-specific. Specifically, the
USPTO definition of small business concern for Regulatory Flexibility
Act purposes is a business or other concern that: (1) Meets the SBA's
definition of a ``business concern or concern'' set forth in 13 CFR
121.105; and (2) meets the size standards set forth in 13 CFR 121.802
for the purpose of paying reduced patent fees, namely an entity: (a)
whose number of employees, including affiliates, does not exceed 500
persons; and (b) which has not assigned, granted, conveyed, or licensed
(and is under no obligation to do so) any rights in the invention to
any person who made it and could not be classified as an independent
inventor, or to any concern which would not qualify as a non-profit
organization or a small business concern under this definition. See
Business Size Standard for Purposes of United States Patent and
Trademark Office Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for Patent-Related
Regulations, 71 FR at 67112 (November 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz. Pat.
Office at 63 (December 12, 2006).
The changes in this proposed rule will apply to any small entity
that files a patent application, or has a pending patent application or
unexpired patent. The changes in this proposed rule will specifically
apply when an applicant or patentee pays an application filing or
national stage entry fee, search fee, examination fee, extension of
time fee, notice of appeal fee, appeal brief fee, request for an oral
hearing fee, petition to revive fee, issue fee, or patent maintenance
fee.
The USPTO has been advised that a number of small entity applicants
and patentees do not claim small entity status for various reasons. See
Business Size Standard for Purposes of United States Patent and
Trademark Office Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for Patent-Related
Regulations, 71 FR at 67110 (November 20, 2006), 1313 Off. Gaz. Pat.
Office at 61 (December 12, 2006). Therefore, the USPTO is also
considering all other entities paying patent fees as well.
4. Description of the projected reporting, recordkeeping and other
compliance requirements of the proposed rules, including an estimate of
the classes of small entities which will
[[Page 37299]]
be subject to the requirement and the type of professional skills
necessary for preparation of the report or record: This notice does not
propose any reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements.
This notice proposes only to adjust patent fees (as discussed
previously) to reflect changes in the CPI.
5. Description of any significant alternatives to the proposed
rules which accomplish the stated objectives of applicable statutes and
which minimize any significant economic impact of the proposed rules on
small entities: The alternative of not adjusting patent fees would have
a lesser economic impact on small entities, but would not accomplish
the stated objectives of applicable statutes. The USPTO is proposing to
adjust the patent fees to ensure proper funding for effective
operations. The patent fee CPI adjustment is a routine adjustment that
has generally occurred on an annual basis to recover the higher costs
of USPTO operations that occur due to the increase in the price of
products and services and to recover the estimated cost to the USPTO
for processing activities and services and materials relating to
patents and trademarks, respectively, including proportionate shares of
the administrative costs of the USPTO. The lack of proper funding for
effective operations would result in a significant increase in patent
pendency levels.
6. Identification, to the extent practicable, of all relevant
Federal rules which may duplicate, overlap or conflict with the
proposed rules: The USPTO is the sole agency of the United States
Government responsible for administering the provisions of title 35,
United States Code, pertaining to examination and granting patents.
Therefore, no other Federal, state, or local entity shares jurisdiction
over the examination and granting of patents.
Other countries, however, have their own patent laws, and an entity
desiring a patent in a particular country must make an application for
patent in that country, in accordance with the applicable law. Although
the potential for overlap exists internationally, this cannot be
avoided except by treaty (such as the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property, or the Patent Cooperation Treaty
(PCT)). Nevertheless, the USPTO believes that there are no other
duplicative or overlapping rules.
B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): This rule making does not
contain policies with federalism implications sufficient to warrant
preparation of a Federalism Assessment under Executive Order 13132
(Aug. 4, 1999).
C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review): This
rule making has been determined to be significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993), as amended by Executive Order
13258 (Feb. 26, 2002), and Executive Order 13422 (Jan. 18, 2007).
D. Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review): The Office has complied with Executive Order 13563 (Jan. 8,
2011). Specifically, the Office has: (1) Used the best available
techniques to quantify costs and benefits, and has considered values
such as equity, fairness and distributive impacts; (2) provided the
public with a meaningful opportunity to participate in the regulatory
process, including soliciting the views of those likely affected, by
issuing this notice of proposed rule making and providing on-line
access to the rule making docket; (3) attempted to promote
coordination, simplification and harmonization across government
agencies and identified goals designed to promote innovation; (4)
considered approaches that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and
freedom of choice for the public; and (5) ensured the objectivity of
scientific and technological information and processes, to the extent
applicable.
E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation): This rule making
will not: (1) Have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes; (2) impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal
governments; or (3) preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal summary
impact statement is not required under Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6,
2000).
F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects): This rule making is not
a significant energy action under Executive Order 13211 because this
rule making is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of
Energy Effects is not required under Executive Order 13211 (May 18,
2001).
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform): This rule making
meets applicable standards to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity,
and reduce burden as set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).
H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children): This rule making
is not an economically significant rule and does not concern an
environmental risk to health or safety that may disproportionately
affect children under Executive Order 13045 (Apr. 21, 1997).
I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property): This rule
making will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 1988).
J. Congressional Review Act: Under the Congressional Review Act
provisions of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to issuing any final rule, the USPTO
will submit a report containing the final rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives and
the Comptroller General of the Government Accountability Office. The
changes proposed in this notice are not expected to result in an annual
effect on the economy of 100 million dollars or more, a major increase
in costs or prices, or significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based
enterprises in domestic and export markets. Therefore, this rule making
is not likely to result in a ``major rule'' as defined in 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995: The changes proposed in
this notice do not involve a Federal intergovernmental mandate that
will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments,
in the aggregate, of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or more in any
one year, or a Federal private sector mandate that will result in the
expenditure by the private sector of 100 million dollars (as adjusted)
or more in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary under the
provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. See 2 U.S.C.
1501 et seq.
L. National Environmental Policy Act: This rule making will not
have any effect on the quality of environment and is thus categorically
excluded from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969. See 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
M. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act: The
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) are inapplicable because
this rule making does not contain provisions which involve the use of
technical standards.
N. Paperwork Reduction Act: This proposed rule involves information
collection requirements which are subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
[[Page 37300]]
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The collections of information involved in this proposed rule have
been reviewed and approved by OMB. The Office is not resubmitting
information collection requests to OMB for its review and approval at
this time because the changes proposed in this notice revise the fees
for existing information collection requirements under OMB control
numbers 0651-0016, 0651-0021, 0651-0024, 0651-0031, 0651-0032, 0651-
0033, 0651-0063 and 0651-0064. The USPTO will submit to OMB fee
revision changes for the OMB control numbers 0651-0016, 0651-0021,
0651-0024, 0651-0031, 0651-0032, 0651-0033, 0651-0063 and 0651-0064 if
the changes proposed in this notice are adopted.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects
37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Freedom of
information, Inventions and patents, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
37 CFR Part 41
Administrative practice and procedure, Inventions and patents,
Lawyers.
Dated: June 8, 2011.
David J. Kappos,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2011-16001 Filed 6-24-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
