PTO Appropriations and Fee Diversion

The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) plays an important role in the progress of biotechnology. Its role is inextricably linked to the creation of the necessary pipeline for continued advancement in cutting edge biotechnologies. Adequate funding of the PTO will ensure the security of the biotechnology industry's investment in research and development of biotechnology products. The PTO is a fully user fee funded agency whose funds in the past have been siphoned off for non-PTO programs. The PTO's customers are entitled to receive the best services the agency can provide for the fees they pay. Therefore, a fundamental change in the method by which the PTO is funded is needed. The change is the establishment, by statute, of the principle of no diversion of fees. With no diversion, the PTO would have access to the fees paid by its customers to process their work, while at the same time continue effective oversight by the Administration and Congress. BIO advocates a permanent end to this diversion.

• Temporary PTO Funding Option is Critical For Biotech Innovation and Jobs (Link to BIO Press Release, July 8, 2009)

• BIO Letter to the House Leadership supporting passage of H.R. 1561, the United States Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act of 2003 (Oct. 24, 2003)

• BIO letter supporting passage on HR 1561, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Fee Modernization Act of 2003, which would end patent fee diversion and maximize much needed resources for the PTO. (March 3, 2004)

• Statement before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property (April 3, 2003) (5.6 MB PDF)

• Letter to Office of Management and Budget on the PTO's strategic plan and their fee restructuring proposal (October 24, 2002)

  • Response From PTO Director Rogan (December 3, 2002) (643 KB PDF)

• BIO Statement on Proposed PTO Fee Restructuring (3.4 MB PDF) (July 18, 2002)

• In Depth Legal Analysis of Proposed PTO Fee Restructuring (July 17, 2002) (362 KB PDF)

• BIO letter to J. Dennis Hastert (November 5, 2001) (1.48 MB PDF)

Additional Resources:

• USPTO Director's Blog: http://www.uspto.gov/blog/
• BIO's Comments to the US Patent and Trademark Office on Proposed Rule Changes Concerning Claims Containing Alternative Language (October 9, 2007)
  BIO's comments to the Patent and Trademark Office - Decision, March 20, 2009: Tafas - CAFC Decision 3-20-2009 (PDF)
  Read the comments (3.1 MB PDF)
  
• Patent Law Harmonization (June 22, 2007)
  BIO Letter to the Patent and Trademark Office.
  Read the letter (525 KB PDF)
  
• USPTO's proposed 5-year Strategic Plan (October 6, 2006)
  BIO's written comments
  Read the comments (490 KB PDF)
  
• Comments to the USPTO on the proposed rule changes to Information Disclosure Statements (September 9, 2006)
• Letter opposing proposed PTO changes to patent rules that would limit continuations and examined claims (May 2, 2006) (829 KB PDF)
  
• BIO Response to PTO's Green Paper (September 14, 2005) (60 KB PDF)
  
• Letter to James E. Rogan on Unity of Invention (December 5, 2003) (16.8 MB PDF)
  
• Letter to James Rogan, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO on Patent Harmonization (May 6, 2002) (273 KB PDF)