Skip Navigation

Appendix A: Performance and Resource Tables

 

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2.2

Protect intellectual property and improve the patent and trademark system

OBJECTIVE 2.2 RESOURCES
(Dollars in Millions)
  FY 2000
Actual		 FY 2001
Actual		 FY 2002
Actual		 FY 2003
Actual		 FY 2004
Actual		 FY 2005
Actual		 FY 2006
Actual		 FY 2007
Actual
Total Funding $872.2 $1,008.5 $1,099.5 $1,190.9 $1,233.3 $1,508.4 $1,674.4 $1,766.4
FTE – Full-Time Equivalent 6,007 6,149 6,593 6,581 6,627 6,825 7,446 8,291

 

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME: Optimize patent quality and timeliness (USPTO)1

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME RESOURCES
(Dollars in Millions)
  FY 2000
Actual		 FY 2001
Actual		 FY 2002
Actual		 FY 2003
Actual		 FY 2004
Actual		 FY 2005
Actual		 FY 2006
Actual		 FY 2007
Actual
Total Funding $738.3 $887.3 $976.6 $1,019.6 $1,059.3 $1,245.8 $1,347.9 $1,506.8
FTE – Full-Time Equivalent 5,136 5,316 5,720 5,815 5,899 6,021 5,994 7,073

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent allowance compliance rate1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 96.5% 96.0%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 3.5% 4.0%
FY 2005 Red (Did not meet target) 4.6% 4.0%
FY 2004 Red (Did not meet target) 5.3% 4.0%
FY 2003 Red (Did not meet target) 4.4% 4.0%
FY 2002 Green (Met target) 4.2% 5.0%
FY 2001 2 5.4%  
FY 2000   6.6%  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was known as “Patent error rate (allowance).” The new wording is in effect the inverse of that measure. (back)
2 Prior to FY 2002, USPTO had not yet developed targets though it had tracked the data. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent in-process examination compliance rate
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 92.2% 90.0%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 90.0% 86.0%
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 86.2% 84.0%
FY 2004   New—no target to measure against  

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent average first action pendency (months)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Red (Did not meet target) 25.3 23.7
Performance was not met, because:
This target was not met due to the outdated patent pendency model that was used to forecast and set the target for this measure.
Strategies for Improvement:
USPTO plans to examine these issues by contracting with a forecast modeling expert. The expert will also provide USPTO with advice on how to best project first action pendency.
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Yellow (Slightly below target) 22.6 22.0
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 21.1 21.3
FY 2004 Green (Met target) 20.2 20.2
FY 2003 Green (Met target) 18.3 18.4
FY 2002 Red (Did not meet target) 16.7 14.7
FY 2001 Red (Did not meet target) 14.4 13.9
FY 2000 Green (Met target) 13.6 14.2

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent average total pendency (months)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 31.9 33.0
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 31.1 31.3
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 29.1 31.0
FY 2004 Green (Met target) 27.6 29.8
FY 2003 Green (Met target) 26.7 27.7
FY 2002 Green (Met target) 24.0 26.5
FY 2001 Green (Met target) 24.7 26.2
FY 2000 Green (Met target) 25.0 26.2

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent efficiency (cost per patent production unit)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) $3,961 $4,253
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) $3,798 $4,214
FY 2005 Green (Met target) $3,877 $4,122
FY 2004 Yellow (Slightly below target) $3,556 $3,502
FY 2003 Green (Met target) $3,329 $3,444
FY 2002 1 $3,376  
FY 2001   $3,210  
FY 2000   $2,917  
1 Prior to FY 2003, USPTO had not yet developed targets though it had tracked the data. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent applications filed electronically1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 49.3% 40.0%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Blue (Exceeded target) 14.2% 10.0%
FY 2005 Red (Did not meet target) 2.2% 4.0%
FY 2004 Red (Did not meet target) 1.5% 2.0%
FY 2003 Red (Did not meet target) 1.3% 2.0%
FY 2002   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was under the outcome “Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-government environment and advancing intellectual property development worldwide;” which was reworded in FY 2007 so as to reflect a focus on worldwide activities. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Patent applications managed electronically1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 99.9% 99.9%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 99.9% 99.0%
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 96.7% 90.0%
FY 2004 Blue (Exceeded target) 88.0% 70.0%
FY 2003   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was under the outcome “Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-government environment and advancing intellectual property development worldwide;” which was reworded in FY 2007 so as to reflect a focus on worldwide activities. (back)

 

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME: Optimize trademark quality and timeliness (USPTO)2

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME RESOURCES
(Dollars in Millions)
  FY 2000
Actual		 FY 2001
Actual		 FY 2002
Actual		 FY 2003
Actual		 FY 2004
Actual		 FY 2005
Actual		 FY 2006
Actual		 FY 2007
Actual
Total Funding $133.3 $120.2 $122.9 $119.4 $112.0 $144.9 $149.6 $191.2
FTE – Full-Time Equivalent 871 942 873 719 693 730 665 897

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark first action compliance rate1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 95.9% 95.5%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Blue (Exceeded target) 4.3% 6.5%
FY 2005 Blue (Exceeded target) 4.7% 7.5%
FY 2004 Green (Met target) 7.9% 8.3%
FY 2003   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was known as “Trademark first action deficiency rate.” The new wording is in effect the inverse of that measure. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark final action compliance rate1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 97.4% 96.0%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Blue (Exceeded target) 3.6% 6.5%
FY 2005 Red (Did not meet target) 5.9% 5.0%
FY 2004 Red (Did not meet target) 5.8% 5.0%
FY 2003   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was known as “Trademark final action deficiency rate.” The new wording is in effect the inverse of that measure. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark efficiency (cost per trademark production unit)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) $660 $685
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) $565 $635
FY 2005 Green (Met target) $677 $701
FY 2004 Green (Met target) $542 $583
FY 2003 Blue (Exceeded target) $433 $683
FY 2002 1 $487  
FY 2001   $501  
FY 2000   $568  
1 Prior to FY 2003, USPTO had not yet developed targets though it had tracked the data. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark first action pendency (months)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 2.9 3.7
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 4.8 5.3
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 6.3 6.4
FY 2004 Red (Did not meet target) 6.6 5.4
FY 2003 Red (Did not meet target) 5.4 3.0
FY 2002 Red (Did not meet target) 4.3 3.0
FY 2001 Blue (Exceeded target) 2.7 6.6
FY 2000 Red (Did not meet target) 5.7 4.5

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark average total pendency (months)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 15.1 17.3
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 18.0 18.8
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 19.6 20.3
FY 2004 Green (Met target) 19.5 21.6
FY 2003 Red (Did not meet target) 19.8 15.5
FY 2002 Red (Did not meet target) 19.9 15.5
FY 2001 Green (Met target) 17.8 18.0
FY 2000 Green (Met target) 17.3 18.0

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark applications filed electronically1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 95.4% 90%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 93.8% 80.0%
FY 2005 Blue (Exceeded target) 88.0% 70.0%
FY 2004 Green (Met target) 73.0% 65.0%
FY 2003 Red (Did not meet target) 57.5% 80.0%
FY 2002 Red (Did not meet target) 38.0% 50.0%
FY 2001 Red (Did not meet target) 24.0% 30.0%
FY 2000   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was under the outcome “Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-government environment and advancing intellectual property development worldwide;” which was reworded in FY 2007 so as to reflect a focus on worldwide activities. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark applications managed electronically1
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 99.99% 99.0%
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 99.98% 99.0%
FY 2005 Green (Met target) 99.0% 99.0%
FY 2004 Blue (Exceeded target) 98.0% 80.0%
FY 2003   New—no target to measure against  
1 Prior to FY 2007, this measure was under the outcome “Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-government environment and advancing intellectual property development worldwide;” which was reworded in FY 2007 so as to reflect a focus on worldwide activities. (back)

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Trademark average pendency excluding suspended and inter partes cases (months)
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Green (Met target) 13.4 14.8
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006 Green (Met target) 15.5 16.3
FY 2005   New—no target to measure against  

 

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME: Improve intellectual property and enforcement domestically and abroad (USPTO)3

PERFORMANCE OUTCOME RESOURCES
(Dollars in Millions)
  FY 2000
Actual		 FY 2001
Actual		 FY 2002
Actual		 FY 2003
Actual		 FY 2004
Actual		 FY 2005
Actual		 FY 2006
Actual		 FY 2007
Actual
Total Funding N/A N/A N/A $51.9 $62.0 $117.7 $176.9 $68.4
FTE – Full-Time Equivalent       47 102 74 787 321

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Number of instances in which External Affairs (EA) experts review intellectual property (IP) policies/standards
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Blue (Exceeded target) 461 80
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006   New—no target to measure against  

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Improving worldwide IP expertise for U.S. government interests
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Blue (Exceeded target) 17 10
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006   New—no target to measure against  

USPTO PERFORMANCE MEASURE
MEASURE: Plans of actions, mechanisms, and support programs initiated or implemented in developing countries
Year Status Actual Target
FY 2007 Blue (Exceeded target) 15 8
Year Status Historical Results Historical Target
FY 2006   New—no target to measure against  

 

1 Prior to FY 2007, this outcome was known as “Improve the quality of patent products and services and optimize patent processing time.” (back)
2 Prior to FY 2007, this outcome was known as “Improve the quality of trademark products and services and optimize trademark processing time.” (back)
3 Prior to FY 2007, this outcome was known as “Create a more flexible organization through transitioning patent and trademark operations to an e-government environment and advancing intellectual property development worldwide.” (back)
Previous Page | Next Page