Tafas v. Dudas et al

Filing 79

Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Notices For Depositions of Senior U.S. PTO Officials re 66 Memorandum in Opposition, filed by Triantafyllos Tafas. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 to Tafas' Supplemental Brief In Support of Notices for Depositions of Senior U.S. PTO Officials# 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2 to Tafas' Supplemental Brief In Support of Notices for Depositions of Senior U.S. PTO Officials# 3 Exhibit Exhibit 3 to Tafas' Supplemental Brief In Support of Notices for Depositions of Senior U.S. PTO Officials# 4 Exhibit Exhibit 4 to Tafas' Supplemental Brief In Support of Notices for Depositions of Senior U.S. PTO Officials)(Wilson, Joseph) Modified on 11/23/2007 to reflect the title of docket entry (klau, ).

Tafas v. Dudas et al

Doc. 79 Att. 1

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 79-2

Filed 11/20/2007

Page 1 of 3

EXHIBIT 1

Dockets.Justia.com

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 79-2

Filed 11/20/2007

Page 2 of 3

Proposed Topics of Director Jon W. Dudas

1.

Broad Lines of Inquiry Inquiry into whether the USPTO has a good faith belief that the continuation rules will reduce its backlog without affecting substantive rights.

Exemplar Issues · Basis for Director Dudas's conclusions in his sworn testimony before the Committee of the Judiciary in 2005 and 2006 that continuation application filings and continuation-in-part application filing comprise "rework" of the same invention originally sought by an applicant. · Basis for his statements to Congress on the number of applications in 2004 and 2005 that comprised "rework."

2.

Probing the good faith basis of the numbers supplied to the Office of Management and Budget in regard to expected applications to be filed with an Examination Support Document and the number of continuation petitions to be filed after promulgation of the new rules. Probe inconsistencies between OMB data and statements made by USPTO in respect of the significance of the ESD and petition options.

· Efforts undertaken by Director Dudas to comply with the requirements of the Paper Reduction Act. · Process for Director Dudas to assure appropriate certification under the Paper Reduction Act (as required of the Director under the Act). · The procedures of the USPTO to assure all numbers provided under the Paper Reduction Act to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) are: a. objective and fair b. accurately estimate the burden of any collection on the public c. uses effective and efficient survey methodology appropriate to the purpose for which the information is collected. · Efforts undertaken by Director Dudas to ensure compliance with the Data Quality Act and the OMB Guidelines regarding the same: a. to ensure quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information disseminated by Federal Agency b. efforts undertaken to assure timely correction of information supplied to the OMB c. use of peer review to ensure accurate, reliable and unbiased information.

Case 1:07-cv-00846-JCC-TRJ

Document 79-2

Filed 11/20/2007

Page 3 of 3

3.

Inquiry into USPTO's good faith belief that the New Rules do not violate the constitution.

· Efforts undertaken by Director Dudas to support and defend Article I., Section 8 of the Constitution in respect of assuring any regulations passed by the USPTO do not adversely affect the promotion of science and the useful arts. · USPTO procedure to weigh the effect of its proposed regulations on the promotion of science and the useful arts.

4.

Good faith basis for the Certification Analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

· Efforts undertaken by Director Dudas, pursuant to his obligations under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, to assure the sound statistical basis for the certification of no substantial impact of the new rules on small entities. · Consideration by USPTO of permitting small entities the opportunity to participate in rule making.

5.

Good faith basis for separating other proposed rules being considered by the USPTO in tandem with release of proposed rules.

· Consideration of OMB burdens in the separation of the rule packages. · Consideration of the effect of such packages on the proposed continuation-claim rule package set forth to the public. · Basis for separating the new proposed appeals rules from the continuation/claim rules. · Efforts undertaken to determine the effect of the new appeals rules on costs with respect to small entities.