[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 231 (Monday, December 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72064-72065]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28742]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No. PTO-C-2013-0039]
Request for Comments on Methods for Studying the Diversity of
Patent Applicants
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Request for Comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'' or
``the Office'') is interested in gathering information on approaches
for studying the diversity of patent applicants in accordance with
research methodology developed as required by the America Invents Act
(AIA or Act). To assist in gathering this information, the USPTO
invites the public to provide comments on collecting information on the
diversity of patent applicants consistent with the AIA.
Written Comments: Written comments should be sent by email to
[email protected]. Comments may also be submitted by
postal mail addressed to Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Expert Advisor, Office
of Chief Economist, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Mail
Stop External Affairs, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Although comments may be submitted by postal mail, the USPTO prefers to
receive comments via email. The deadline for receipt of written
comments is January 31, 2014. Written comments should be identified in
the subject line of the email or postal mailing as ``Diversity of
Patent Applicants.''
Because written comments will be made available for public
inspection, information that a respondent does not desire to be made
public, such as a telephone number, should not be included in the
written comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Expert Advisor,
Office of Chief Economist, by telephone at (571) 272-6900, or by email
at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 29 of the AIA charged the Director
of the USPTO with ``establish[ing] methods for studying the diversity
of patent applicants, including those applicants who are minorities,
women, or veterans'' no later than six months after the enactment of
the Act (i.e., by March 16, 2012). This section further provided that
the Director shall not use the results of such study to provide any
preferential treatment to patent applicants. The USPTO developed and
timely published a methodology to study important issues related to
applicant diversity. See ``Diversity of Applicant Methodology'' (March
16, 2012) on USPTO Web site for AIA Implementation (under
``Programs'').
This methodology respects the interests of individuals and
organizations in protecting private information. It underscores the
Office's sensitivity to this issue by taking an iterative, careful
approach to potentially sensitive information from patent applicants,
and includes input from the public. The methodology includes two
initial steps: (1) Cooperate with the U.S. Census Bureau (``Census'')
to analyze currently available public information data; and (2) seek
public comment on whether or how to collect additional information.
This Request for Comments constitutes the second stop in the
methodology.
As to the first step in the methodology, the USPTO cooperated with
Census to analyze currently available public information data.
Consistent with the language and legislative history of Section 29 of
the AIA, the analysis sought: (1) To describe the overall, cumulative
(i.e., highly aggregated) demographic characteristics, such as race,
gender, age, and geography, of inventors as a group; and (2) to
describe the overall, cumulative (i.e., highly aggregated) business
characteristics, such as revenues, number of employees, and geography,
for companies as a group. Note that this analysis gathered and
evaluated cumulative data on groups of individuals and companies; this
analysis did not gather and evaluate data in a manner that would
identify any particular individual or company.
The analysis sought to match certain public information in USPTO
files with confidential census information in Census files. Consistent
with AIA Section 29, USPTO's analysis aimed to identify group
demographics like race, gender and age of inventors in patents granted
in 2005-2006; USPTO did not seek or obtain such demographic information
for any particular inventor.
By using existing data and cooperating with Census, the USPTO could
avoid any additional burden on applicants while also protecting the
identity of particular individuals and companies. This is because
Census would only share with USPTO the highly aggregated group data
(i.e., devoid of any personal identifying information). Because
sensitive Census information concerning diversity characteristics is
protected under Title 13, United States Code, once the USPTO
information becomes comingled with Census data, that comingled data is
confidential under Title 13 and cannot be released.
The data provided by USPTO for this analysis consisted only of
certain public information provided on the face of patents granted
between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2006. This information was
the name and address (generally only the town and state) of the
inventor. As stated above, USPTO provided this public information to
Census, and Census then confidentially attempted to match this data
against its own data with the goal of identifying, on an overall basis,
the cumulative demographic information of the inventors as a group.
The analysis was only partially successful, however, since Census
was able to match only 64% of the inventors provided by USPTO. The
basic information collected by the USPTO from inventors--i.e., name,
town, and state--was not a particularly strong basis for matching with
Census data. For example, usually it was not possible to match common
names (such as ``John Smith'' or ``Mary Johnson'') in large cities
(such as ``New York, NY'' or ``Chicago, IL''). In sum, the poor quality
of data-matching, as well as some statistical bias, suggest that the
limited
[[Page 72065]]
information currently collected by the USPTO about inventors (i.e.,
name, town, state) is not sufficient to allow Census to meaningfully
describe the cumulative diversity characteristics of inventors as a
group within the meaning of AIA Section 29.
In sum, the first step of USPTO's methodology under AIA Section 29
was to cooperate with Census to analyze currently available data. The
aim was to identify demographic information about inventors of patents
granted in 2005-2006, as a collective group. Since step one was only
partially successful, the Agency now proceeds to step two, which is to
seek public comments on whether or how to collect further information
for completing the diversity study under AIA Section 29.
Issues For Comment: The USPTO seeks comments on how to study the
diversity of patent applicants before the USPTO pursuant to AIA Section
29. The questions below are intended to aid the USPTO in assessing
whether and how to collect further information and in considering
potential next steps for a diversity study. The questions should not be
taken as an indication that the USPTO has taken a position or is
predisposed to any particular view. The public is invited to answer any
or all of these questions. The public is also invited to submit
comments on any related issues that they believe are relevant.
(1) How and by which methods should the USPTO effectively study
patent applicant diversity in accordance with the expressed intent of
Congress in Section 29 of the AIA?
(2) Should the USPTO conduct surveys of patent applicants to obtain
demographic data such as race, gender, age, and geography, of inventors
as a group?
(3) Aside from surveys, how can the USPTO effectively collect
personal identifying information about U.S. and non-U.S. patent
applicants in order to study applicant diversity through improved data
matching, analytics, and studies?
(a) Should the USPTO collect certain personal identifying
information about U.S. and non-U.S. patent applicants on a mandatory
basis or on a voluntary basis? How would each of these approaches
affect the accuracy of the information being provided?
(b) Can USPTO effectively collect personal identifying information
from other institutions or organizations about U.S. and non-U.S. patent
applicants?
(4) What particular personal identifying information should the
USPTO seek (or not seek) in order to more effectively study applicant
diversity? Why?
Dated: November 25, 2013.
Margaret A. Focarino,
Commissioner for Patents.
[FR Doc. 2013-28742 Filed 11-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P