(c) report to the President of the United States and to the United States
Congress, on an annual basis, an evaluation of the operation of the PTO,
including fiscal matters, and any recommendations for improving such
operations or amending the laws of the United States, or the regulations
implementing such laws, to the extent the amendments would directly affect
such operations;

(d) undertake studies or investigations, evaluate proposals, or develop
information relating to the PTO, including fiscal matters, at the request of
the President of the United States or the United States Congress, and report
the results thereof with dispatch; and

(e) establish and oversee the work of a professional staff of the committee,
which shall be responsible for assisting it in the discharge of its responsibili-
ties.

A purpose of the patent and trademark laws is to benefit the American public by providing useful commercial rights to the business community, and as to patents, to the innovative business sector. The users of the PTO services who now completely fund the PTO operation merit an effective voice in defining PTO goals, priorities, and administrative practices and procedures. The advisory committee would have no authority over PTO operations save the authority to offer advice. However, the users of PTO services are in a better position than both Congress and the PTO to evaluate whether the manner in which those services are provided meet their needs. Providing a formal mechanism for the private sector to advise Congress and the PTO on how the patent and trademark laws are being administered can only provide useful information to those who have the affirmative responsibility to ensure the PTO is operating with optimal efficiency and effectiveness. Currently, such advice, particularly regarding fiscal matters, is not available. A critical factor to the proper operation of the advisory committee is the authority to retain competent staff support sufficient to allow the committee discharge its responsibilities and particularly to respond to specific requests by Congress for information.

Resolution Three: BORROWING AUTHORITY

RESOLVED, that, in the event the funding of capital and other extraordinary
expenses associated with the operation of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (PTO) through Congressional appropriations from general
tax revenues is not restored, the American Intellectual Property Law
Association favors that an appropriate government authority be created which
shall be given the following powers:

(a) to purchase assets and hold such assets for the exclusive benefit of the
PTO, including, but not limited to buildings, furnishings, and equipment;

The Board of Directors of the American Intellectual Property Law Association

President
President-Elect

First Vice-President
Second Vice-President
Immediate Past Presdient

Secretary
Treasurer

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

Director

I. Fred Koenigsberg
William L. LaFuze
Gary L. Newtson
Robert A. Armitage
Jerome G. Lee
Robert J. Bernstein
David A. Rose
Richard H. Burgess
Donald S. Chisum
Ronald B. Coolley
Thomas L. Irving
Walter N. Kirn
Kenneth E. Krosin
Don W. Martens
Stephen L. Noe
Robert W. Sacoff
Sue Z. Shaper
Roger S. Smith

Richard C. Witte

The Special Committee on the PTO as a Government Corporation

Robert A. Armitage, Chair

Joseph A. DeGrandi,

James H. Laughlin, Jr.

Hoge T. Sutherland

Rene D. Tegtmeyer

Historical Recognition of Quality Issues
in the PTO's Patent Operations

Improving the administration of the patent law has been a subject of discussion and controversy for nearly 200 years. The fundamentals of the current law as well as the Patent Office have been in place since the Patent Act of 1836. During the 156 years since then, the number of Patent Office employees has increased to meet application filing levels. Periodically there have been internal structural changes, such as establishing a board of appeals, and operating improvements, such as adopting a classification system for issued patents. But even significant changes such as these have been few, and those have been slow in coming.

The basic problems of the PTO, which exist today, have been identified and studied over such a long period of years that they have reached an almost legendary status. Recommendations for reform have been made, and largely ignored. To demonstrate the persistence of inertia, one begins with the Report of the President's Commission on Economy and Efficiency: "Investigation of the United States Patent Office", transmitted to Congress by President Taft on December 9, 1912. This "Taft Commission" report was requested by the enactment of a Joint Resolution of Congress, which asked the President to determine just what was needed "to enable the Patent Office to discharge its duties in a thoroughly efficient and economical manner."

The "Taft Commission" recommended that the Patent Office be made into an independent government agency:

In 1849 came the creation of the Department of the Interior and under it was
placed the Patent Office. As early as 1852 complaints were made by the
commissioner that the Patent Office has no more logical connection with the
department than it has with any other; that it suffers with all the inconvenienc-
es and embarrassments of such relation, but gains none of the advantages.
This idea has continued until the present time. It is often recommended that
the Patent Office be made an absolutely independent bureau, whose head
shall be appointed for life. The English hold this idea too. In 1904 Mr.
Charles D. Abel, in his discussion which so largely affected legislation on the
English patent system, strongly favored the independence of the office of
secondary authority. He would have the comptroller general, as the chief
official is designated, responsible to the Cabinet and Parliament, nor does he
fail to criticize us for the subordination of our office. (pp. 231,232)

The commission pointed out that the problem of subordination had nothing to do with interference with the substantive work of the Patent Office:

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

RESOLUTIONS OF THE ASSOCIATION

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Government Corporation Status for the PTO
Private Sector Advisory Committee
Borrowing Authority

HISTORICAL RECOGNITION OF QUALITY ISSUES
IN THE PTO's PATENT OPERATION

Taft Commission (1912) .
Kintner Report (1962)

President's Commission on the Patent System (1966)
Recent Consideration by the U.S. Congress (1980).

Improving the Efficiency of the PTO in the
Public Interest ...

1

2

4

5

5

6

8

11

13

14

A.

B.

C.

D.

1)

16

THE USERS' PERSPECTIVE ON CURRENT QUALITY ISSUES
IN THE PTO