<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>IPWatchdog.com &#124; Patents &#38; Patent Law &#187; three track</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ipwatchdog.com/tag/three-track/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com</link>
	<description>Patents, Software Patents, Patent Applications &#38; Patent Law</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 11:45:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Track One By the Numbers. What are you Waiting for?</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/22/track-one-by-the-numbers/id=22973/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/22/track-one-by-the-numbers/id=22973/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Licensing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Litigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accelerated examination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[allowances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Kappos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent allowance rate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent backlog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent pendency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecution history estoppel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Track One]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=22973</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The USPTO has returned to the historical philosophy that patent examiners should work cooperatively with patent applicants to identify allowable subject matter and issue patents on what is allowable, not just focusing on rejection after rejection after rejection. While there are quite a few positive changes, with more in the works, Track One is by far the most successful policy initiative that has come to bear during the Kappos Administration.  The only problem with Track One is that more applicants are not using it!  What are you waiting for? A look at the numbers shows that Track One is a huge success and ought to be employed far more than it has been.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/04/patent-strategy-discovering-crucial-patent-examiner-data/id=21559/' rel='bookmark' title='Patent Strategy: Discovering Crucial Patent Examiner Data'>Patent Strategy: Discovering Crucial Patent Examiner Data</a><small>What if you could have a crystal ball looking inside the United States Patent and Trademark Office to easily determine an array of statistical information related to a particular Art Unit or even a specific Patent Examiner? Can you imagine the types of strategic consultations you could engage in with clients? Clients hate being surprised with additional fees and unexplained and/or unexpected delays. What if you could with a few clicks of your mouse find out all kinds of information about a Patent Examiner and/or Art Unit? The amount of cases requiring an RCE, the average number of office actions,...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/04/04/uspto-requests-prioritized-examination-of-patent-applications-may-4/id=16264/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011'>USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011</a><small>The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today plans for the agency to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications – allowing inventors and businesses to have their patents processed within 12 months. It currently takes nearly three years to process the average patent. The program, called Track One, launches May 4, 2011, and is part of a new Three-Track system, which will provide applicants with greater control over when their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/08/16/reducing-patent-backlog-prosecution-costs-using-pair-data/id=12108/' rel='bookmark' title='Reducing Patent Backlog and Prosecution Costs Using PAIR Data'>Reducing Patent Backlog and Prosecution Costs Using PAIR Data</a><small>Patent applications as a whole over the past 10 years have had an average allowance to rejection ratio of about 0.3. We arrived at this ratio by generating a list of 300 randomly selected application serial numbers in the 10/, 11/, and 12/ series, and individually reviewing the transaction histories for each serial number. An allowance to rejection ratio of 0.3 corresponds to about one allowance for every three rejections. First office actions have a somewhat lower allowance ratio than the average. This is consistent with the common knowledge that applicants will take a more aggressive position with the claims...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/22/track-one-by-the-numbers/id=22973/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Kappos 2.0: Exclusive Interview with PTO Director David Kappos</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/09/kappos-2-0-exclusive-interview-with-pto-director-david-kappos/id=21686/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/09/kappos-2-0-exclusive-interview-with-pto-director-david-kappos/id=21686/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 21:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interviews & Conversations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Kappos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kappos Interview]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[request for continued examination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO 2.0]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=21686</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Director Kappos was extremely gracious with his time, speaking to me on the record for nearly 90 minutes.  He answered every one of my questions without dodging, and even spent time to discuss several things I did not raise.  Truthfully, I could have spoken with Director Kappos for many additional hours, but I believe you will find that neither I or he shied away from any topics.  We chatted about the problems with lengthy application delays, the increasing discontent within the patent bar regarding RCE filings, the America Invents Act and the challenges he faces getting 6000+ patent examiners on the same page with policy initiatives, among many other things.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/04/02/new-pto-initiative-gives-more-opportunities-to-amend-after-final/id=23753/' rel='bookmark' title='New PTO Initiative Gives More Opportunities to Amend After Final'>New PTO Initiative Gives More Opportunities to Amend After Final</a><small>All and all this seems like a positive development. If you do provide a claim set that defines the invention from broad to narrow it seems extremely likely that at least some claims could be obtained in a case given that amendments can now be filed if they place the application in condition for allowance by adding one or more new limitations that require only a limited amount of further consideration or search. Assuming that the Patent Examiners do search the disclosure, like they are supposed to, and not just the initial claim set, allowable matter should be present and...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/10/14/allowance-rate-uspto-fiscal-2010/id=12794/' rel='bookmark' title='Allowance Rate of 45.6% at USPTO for Fiscal 2010'>Allowance Rate of 45.6% at USPTO for Fiscal 2010</a><small>Hopefully the seemingly modest successes of team Kappos in fiscal 2010 will be viewed for what they are, which is rather extraordinary, by our leaders in Washington, DC. With all the odds against them, having to fight daily for adequate funding, fewer patent examiners and a Congress that STILL siphons money paid by innovators away from the Patent Office, team Kappos was still able to increase allowances by 5.3% and dent the backlog. Can you imagine what they could do with adequate funding? ...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/22/track-one-by-the-numbers/id=22973/' rel='bookmark' title='Track One By the Numbers. What are you Waiting for?'>Track One By the Numbers. What are you Waiting for?</a><small>The USPTO has returned to the historical philosophy that patent examiners should work cooperatively with patent applicants to identify allowable subject matter and issue patents on what is allowable, not just focusing on rejection after rejection after rejection. While there are quite a few positive changes, with more in the works, Track One is by far the most successful policy initiative that has come to bear during the Kappos Administration. The only problem with Track One is that more applicants are not using it! What are you waiting for? A look at the numbers shows that Track One is a...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/09/kappos-2-0-exclusive-interview-with-pto-director-david-kappos/id=21686/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Patent Strategy: Discovering Crucial Patent Examiner Data</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/04/patent-strategy-discovering-crucial-patent-examiner-data/id=21559/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/04/patent-strategy-discovering-crucial-patent-examiner-data/id=21559/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 12:25:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accelerated examination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art Unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christopher Hold]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Joseph Kelly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent backlog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent examiners]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent pendency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent prosecution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PatentCore]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track 1]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ipwatchdog.com/?p=21559</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What if you could have a crystal ball looking inside the United States Patent and Trademark Office to easily determine an array of statistical information related to a particular Art Unit or even a specific Patent Examiner? Can you imagine the types of strategic consultations you could engage in with clients?  Clients hate being surprised with additional fees and unexplained and/or unexpected delays.  What if you could with a few clicks of your mouse find out all kinds of information about a Patent Examiner and/or Art Unit?  The amount of cases requiring an RCE, the average number of office actions, how often appeals are successful, how long it takes on average to get a patent, among much more information?  Thanks to a new system created by patent attorneys Chris Holt and Joseph Kelly — the PatentCore™ system — you can obtain actionable and immediate intelligence on any patent examiner and on any Art Unit.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/03/22/track-one-by-the-numbers/id=22973/' rel='bookmark' title='Track One By the Numbers. What are you Waiting for?'>Track One By the Numbers. What are you Waiting for?</a><small>The USPTO has returned to the historical philosophy that patent examiners should work cooperatively with patent applicants to identify allowable subject matter and issue patents on what is allowable, not just focusing on rejection after rejection after rejection. While there are quite a few positive changes, with more in the works, Track One is by far the most successful policy initiative that has come to bear during the Kappos Administration. The only problem with Track One is that more applicants are not using it! What are you waiting for? A look at the numbers shows that Track One is a...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/22/business-methods-by-the-numbers-a-look-inside-pto-class-705/id=21892/' rel='bookmark' title='Business Methods by the Numbers: A Look Inside PTO Class 705'>Business Methods by the Numbers: A Look Inside PTO Class 705</a><small>What these numbers tell you is if your application is in Art Unit 3622 or 3689 you are in for a long wait to obtain a patent. The numbers also show that if you carry the case all the way through appeal there is quite a high success rate for applicants; 66.7% when in Art Unit 3622 and 71.4% when in Art Unit 3689. It is hard to know for sure what is going on in Art Units 3622 and 3689, but one number jumps out at me as particularly alarming. In Art Unit 3689 nearly 4 out of 5...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2013/01/02/patentcore-joins-forces-with-lexisnexis-on-patent-advisor/id=32644/' rel='bookmark' title='PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™'>PatentCore Joins Forces with LexisNexis® on Patent Advisor™</a><small>Reed Technology and Information Services Inc., a part of the LexisNexis® family and a provider of content management services, announced earlier today that it has joined forces with PatentCore. You may recall that PatentCore is a publisher of online Patent Office analytics, which for the first time has given the patent bar and public a snapshot look at what goes on inside the Patent Office Art Unit by Art Unit and patent examiner by patent examiner....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2012/01/04/patent-strategy-discovering-crucial-patent-examiner-data/id=21559/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>36</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/04/04/uspto-requests-prioritized-examination-of-patent-applications-may-4/id=16264/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/04/04/uspto-requests-prioritized-examination-of-patent-applications-may-4/id=16264/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 22:45:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>U.S.P.T.O.</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accelerated examination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united states patent office]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ipwatchdog.com/?p=16264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today plans for the agency to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications – allowing inventors and businesses to have their patents processed within 12 months. It currently takes nearly three years to process the average patent. The program, called Track One, launches May 4, 2011, and is part of a new Three-Track system, which will provide applicants with greater control over when their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/02/02/track-one-acceleration-working-off-the-tail/id=14970/' rel='bookmark' title='PTO: $4000 for Track One Acceleration + Working Off the Tail'>PTO: $4000 for Track One Acceleration + Working Off the Tail</a><small>On Friday, February 4, 2011, the USPTO will publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking on “Track One” of the program, which will give applicants the opportunity for prioritized examination of a patent within 12 months of its filing date for a proposed fee of $4,000. Sadly, because the Patent Office does not have fee setting authority there will be no reduction in fees available to small entities who otherwise normally pay 50% of most Patent Office fees. Because the Congress controls which fees qualify for small entity preference everyone will need to pay $4,000 to accelerate...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/07/17/three-track-patent-proposal/id=11695/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO to Host Roundtable on Three-Track Patent Proposal'>USPTO to Host Roundtable on Three-Track Patent Proposal</a><small>The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will be holding a public roundtable discussion on its proposed Enhanced Examination Timing Control Initiative, also known as “Three-Track,” currently under consideration by the USPTO. The purpose of the roundtable meeting is to solicit opinions from the public on the proposed initiative. The meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 20, 2010, from 1:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. at the USPTO headquarters in the Madison Building Auditorium, which is located at 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA, 22314. The meeting will also be webcast....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/06/03/pto-proposes-major-new-patent-application-processing-rules/id=10872/' rel='bookmark' title='PTO Proposes Major New Patent Application Processing Rules'>PTO Proposes Major New Patent Application Processing Rules</a><small>The United States Patent and Trademark Office is seeking public comment on a major new patent examination initiative that would provide applicants greater control over the speed with which their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process. This newly proposed Three-Track program aims to provide applicants with the ability to go faster or slower through the patent process, which will in turn hopefully reduce the pendency of those patent applications that are the most time sensitive. Under Track I applications will be expedited, under Track III they can be slowed at the applicants request....</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/04/04/uspto-requests-prioritized-examination-of-patent-applications-may-4/id=16264/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PTO: $4000 for Track One Acceleration + Working Off the Tail</title>
		<link>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/02/02/track-one-acceleration-working-off-the-tail/id=14970/</link>
		<comments>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/02/02/track-one-acceleration-working-off-the-tail/id=14970/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 22:18:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gene Quinn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gene Quinn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IP News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPWatchdog.com Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Fools™]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Patent Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPTO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[David Kappos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fee diversion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gary locke]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patent office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rulemaking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three track initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[track 1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[working off the tail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[working the tail off]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ipwatchdog.com/?p=14970</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On Friday, February 4, 2011, the USPTO will publish in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking on “Track One” of the program, which will give applicants the opportunity for prioritized examination of a patent within 12 months of its filing date for a proposed fee of $4,000.  Sadly, because the Patent Office does not have fee setting authority there will be no reduction in fees available to small entities who otherwise normally pay 50% of most Patent Office fees. Because the Congress controls which fees qualify for small entity preference everyone will need to pay $4,000 to accelerate under Track One.<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/04/04/uspto-requests-prioritized-examination-of-patent-applications-may-4/id=16264/' rel='bookmark' title='USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011'>USPTO to Begin Accepting Requests for Prioritized Examination of Patent Applications on May 4, 2011</a><small>The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today plans for the agency to begin accepting requests for prioritized examination of patent applications – allowing inventors and businesses to have their patents processed within 12 months. It currently takes nearly three years to process the average patent. The program, called Track One, launches May 4, 2011, and is part of a new Three-Track system, which will provide applicants with greater control over when their applications are examined and promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process....</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/01/26/kappos-congress-funding-reverse-pto-progress/id=14635/' rel='bookmark' title='Kappos to Congress: Funding Woes to Reverse PTO Progress'>Kappos to Congress: Funding Woes to Reverse PTO Progress</a><small>Specifically, we learned that the USPTO projects an average first action pendency of 23 months by the end of fiscal 2011, that participating in the First Action Interview Pilot Program more than doubles the likelihood of getting a first action allowance, that Track 1 rules are imminent with rules for Tracks 2 and 3 to follow and during FY 2010 nearly 6,000 USPTO employees worked from home at least a portion of their work week. We also heard an ominous and declarative statement from Kappos, who told the House Subcommittee on Intellectual Property that the diversion of fees will cause...</small></li>
<li><a href='http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/12/15/us-senate-votes-to-leave-patent-office-underfunded-for-2010/id=7767/' rel='bookmark' title='US Senate Votes to Leave Patent Office Underfunded for 2010'>US Senate Votes to Leave Patent Office Underfunded for 2010</a><small>Congress convened in a rare session last Sunday. On that sleepy news day, the U.S. Senate passed an appropriations bill leaving the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office funding for 2010 essentially the same as 2009. President Obama should send this bill back. The USPTO is solely funded through fees. But Congress controls the purse strings. [...]...</small></li>
</ol>

Related posts brought to you by <a href='http://yarpp.org'>Yet Another Related Posts Plugin</a>.
</div>
]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2011/02/02/track-one-acceleration-working-off-the-tail/id=14970/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
