96-10930. Notice of Hearing and Request for Comments on a Technical Documentation Strategy

[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 86 (Thursday, May 2, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19611-19612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10930]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office


Notice of Hearing and Request for Comments on a Technical 
Documentation Strategy

AGENCY: Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of a hearing and request for public comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) will hold a public 
hearing and is seeking written comments to obtain views of the public 
on the effort of the PTO to make technical documentation accessible to 
patent examiners and the public while adhering to certain constraints 
on financial and personnel resources. Interested members of the public 
are invited to testify at a public hearing and to present written 
comments on the topics outlined in this notice or on any aspect of this 
effort.

DATES: A public hearing will be held at 9:00 a.m. on Friday, May 31, 
1996
    Requests to present oral testimony at the public hearing should be 
received on or before May 30, 1996.
    Any written comments by those persons offering testimony at the 
hearings and related to that testimony should be submitted on or before 
May 30, 1996.
    Other written comments will be accepted until June 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: The hearing will be held in the Commissioner's Conference 
Room (Room 912), Crystal Park Two, 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, 
Virginia.
    Persons wishing to speak at the hearings must notify Mr. Lee 
Schroeder, in writing marked to his attention at Commissioner of 
Patents and Trademarks, Box 4, Washington, DC 20231, or by telephone 
[phone] or by telefax at [phone], in order to be placed 
on a list of speakers for the hearing.
    Persons wishing to offer written comments should address those 
comments to the Commissioner of Patent and Trademarks, Box 4, Patent 
and Trademark Office, Washington, DC 20231, marked to the attention of 
Mr. Lee Schroeder.
    Written comments and transcripts of the hearing will be available 
for public inspection in Room 902 of Crystal Park Two, at 2121 Crystal 
Drive, Arlington, Virginia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lee Schroeder by telephone at 
[phone], by telefax at [phone] or by mail marked to his 
attention and addressed to Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks, Box 
4, Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC 20231.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. Background

    The PTO currently makes technical documentation (foreign and 
domestic patent and non-patent literature in many forms) available to 
persons within the PTO for use in the patent examination process. Much 
of the documentation is accessible through use of the United States 
Patent Classification System (USPCS). The same documentation is made 
available to members of the public for use as a source of technical 
information or for other patent-related uses.
    To better use the limited financial and personnel resources 
available to the PTO, certain changes have been made in the 
documentation area. Less emphasis is being placed on the continuing 
reclassification of the documentation in the USPCS and the 
classification of new foreign patent copies and more reliance is being 
placed on the classification efforts of other countries and the use of 
more sophisticated electronic search tools.
    To be more specific, the PTO is placing increased reliance on the 
many commercial data bases of technical information as well as data 
bases maintained by the PTO. These data bases cover foreign and 
domestic patent and non-patent literature. The PTO is also placing 
increased reliance on the classifying, abstracting and summarizing 
efforts of documentation by both domestic and foreign private entities 
and also by foreign government or intergovernmental entities. 
Consequently, less reliance is being placed on the reclassification 
effort within the PTO. Also, the PTO no longer classifies new foreign 
patents in the USPCS.
    The public's views are sought on the increased reliance on the work 
of others in the classifying, abstracting and summarizing of 
documentation and less reliance on the USPCS and classification efforts 
of persons within the PTO. Public views are also sought on the 
increased reliance on computerized searching aids, be they full text 
data bases or data bases of abstracted material, classified or not. 
Public views are also sought on placing increased reliance on data 
bases and other sources to at least identify such documents after which 
a full-text copy of the document could be obtained.
    Written comments may be offered on the questions posed below. 
Comments will also be accepted on any other aspects of the approach of 
the PTO to make technical information available both to patent 
examiners and the public.

2. Questions for the Hearing

    The public hearing will be held to receive comments on the 
following specific questions:
    A. Are the classification efforts of others (using systems or data 
bases of classification different from the United States Patent 
Classification System) able to replace, or partially replace the

[[Page 19612]]

United States Patent Classification System?
    B. Are the public users of the classified technical information 
systems of the Patent and Trademark Office willing to contribute, or 
contribute more, toward ever increasing costs of maintaining these 
systems?
    C. Since the usefulness of automated search tools is affected by 
the characteristics of the technology being searched, should the Patent 
and Trademark Office tailor the search system by technology rather than 
maintaining the USPCS for all technologies?
    D. Since it is known that different search tools and techniques 
lead to different search results (e.g., different results from text or 
structure search vs. classified image search), are automated assisted 
searches acceptable if there is an overall improvement in the quality 
of the patentability search?
    E. Advances contemplated in future search systems permit the 
examiner to add value to the data base while conducting a search by 
adding or changing classifications for a document, inserting markers 
and notes on a document, adding documents, etc. This value-added 
capability leads to search files that exist only in electronic form and 
which are constantly being upgraded.
    1. Does the public need access to the examiner's search file?
    2. For post-prosecution/litigation purposes, does the public need 
to know what is in the examiner's search file at the time the examiner 
made the search?
    F. How should the Patent and Trademark Office approach the issue of 
classification and retrieval of prior art in view of the current state 
of the art in the electronic document search and retrieval area, and 
expected developments in this area, including fully paperless patent 
and non-patent data bases?

    Dated: April 26, 1996.
Bruce A. Lehman,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and 
Trademarks.
[FR Doc. 96-10930 Filed 5-1-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-M