Peer to patent pilot 2

1,019
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,019
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Peer to patent pilot 2

  1. 1. Peer To Patent Pilot 2 Results
  2. 2. What began with a Modest Proposal Beth NoveckFormer Deputy Chief Technology Officer for Open Government Professor
  3. 3. With the help from our sponsorsPilot 1 Sponsors Pilot 2 Sponsors
  4. 4. Launched a way for the public to collaborate and communicate with the USPTO
  5. 5. Peer To Patent Process Map
  6. 6. Peer To Patent Reviewing Process
  7. 7. Initial hypotheses were supported by the Pilot 1 results (June 15, 2007- June 15, 2009)•Public participation improves the patent examinationprocess.•Citizen experts will participate and produce relevantinformation.•Public participation improves patent quality.
  8. 8. Based on this success, the USPTO elected to conduct a second Peer To Patent pilot and prove that an open network will autonomously expand.
  9. 9. Pilot 2 launched Oct. 1, 2010 ending Sept. 30, 2011The last of the applications finished review Dec. 31, 2011
  10. 10. The USPTO added new challenges toPilot 2 to test the program’s scope.
  11. 11. New Pilot. New Challenges.• Increase in the number of applications allowed by USPTO • Pilot 1: Max 400 • Pilot 2: Max 1000
  12. 12. New Pilot. New Challenges. New technology classifications became eligible for participation: • Pilot One June 2007- April 2008: Computer Architecture, Software and Information Security • Pilot One July 2008- July 2009: Business Methods and E-Commerce • Pilot Two: Biotechnology, Biopharmaceuticals, Telecommunications, Speech Recognition
  13. 13. New Pilot. New Challenges.Increase student involvement•USPTO challenged Peer ToPatent to involve studentsfrom around the country
  14. 14. New Pilot. New Challenges. New Constraints: • Decreased review time from 4 months to 3 months • Reduced number of reviewer submissions from 10 to 6.
  15. 15. New Pilot. New Challenges• New Website design to allow for smoother integration for international projects.
  16. 16. Amount of Participating applications Pilot 1 226 Pilot 2 308
  17. 17. Technology Classifications June 2007- July 2008- Sept 2010- April 2008 July 2009 Oct 2011 Computer Business Methods Biotechnology, Architecture, and E-Commerce Biopharmaceuticals, Software and Telecommunication,Information Security Speech Recognition Applications from 29 Applications from 19 different classes different classes
  18. 18. Technology Classifications of Participating Applications
  19. 19. Pilot 2 Participating Applicants Unique Applicants- 156 Top Participating Applicants
  20. 20. Pilot 1 Participating Applicants ComparisonUnique Applicants- 100 Top Applicants
  21. 21. Citizen ExpertsPilot 2 Reviewing Community•Total Registered Reviewers- 1509•Total Active Reviewers- 603•Total Continuing Reviewers- 211•Total Student Reviewers- 142•Active Reviewers designated by actual participation onwww.peertopatent.org•Continuing reviewers participated in both Pilot 1 and Pilot 2
  22. 22. Citizen-Experts Pilot 1 Comparison
  23. 23. Pilot 2 Traffic Unique Visitors 29,393 Total Visits 47,763 Page Views 217,402 Pages/Visit 4.55Avg. Visit Duration 4:28
  24. 24. Pilot 2 Top Visiting Countries US 30462 UK 3066 India 1778 Canada 1314 Germany 1038
  25. 25. Pilot 2 Visitor Traffic
  26. 26. Pilot 2 Traffic SourcesTop Search Traffic Sources
  27. 27. Pilot 2 Referral Traffic Peak denotes traffic from reddit.com post Nov 9, 2010 Top Referral Sources reddit.com 3880 peertopatent.org 513patentlyo.com 1112 USPTO 365en.wikipedia.org 11008 ipo.gov.uk 353 P2P tumblr 850 Article One Partners 275 facebook 530
  28. 28. Reviewer Activity Pilot 2 2010- Pilot 1 2007- 2011 2009
  29. 29. Student ReviewersOver 40 universities represented
  30. 30. Reviewer Activity 2010-2011 2007-2009Registered 1509 2800ReviewersDiscussion 616 747CommentsAnnotations 179 107 Research 252 68
  31. 31. Student Reviewer Activity
  32. 32. Pilot 2 Reviewer Activity
  33. 33. Pilot 1 Reviewer Activity Comparison
  34. 34. Examiner Office Actions
  35. 35. Peer To Patent Prior Art used in an Office Action
  36. 36. Rejection Basis*Examiner Comment- used to establish “person having skill in the art” but not as a 103 basis
  37. 37. Pilot 2 Prior Artist AwardsAwarded to reviewers whose prior artwas used in an examiner office action
  38. 38. Pilot 1 Prior Artists Comparison
  39. 39. We thank you for your participation!

×