JPO’s Initiatives for World‘s Best Examination Quality

January, 2015

JAPAN PATENT OFFICE

Application

Foreign Patent Offices

Examination Information etc.

Request for Improvement, revisions, etc.

Users(Applicants,

Patent Attorneys)

Notices (Reason for Refusal, Decision to Grant etc.)

EvaluationAdvice

Quality Policy/ManualPlanning quality management initiativesDeveloping systems for quality management

Check whether the management policy, procedures, and systems have been establishedCheck whether quality management that has been implemented complies with the

policy and procedures

Subcommittee on Examination Quality Management

Internal Quality Management CommitteeQuality Management Officer

Patent Examination (Substantive Examination)

FormalityCheck

Approval(Quality Check)

Administrative Affairs Division / Quality Management Office

Commissioner

Deputy Commissioner

JPO

Examination Divisions

IT Systems

LawsExam. Standards

PersonnelRecruitment

Training

Outsourcing Search

Ability Development(Participating Training)

Assignment of Classification

QMS - Quality Management System in JPO

Quality Management Initiatives

Providing Information User Satisfaction Survey

Quality Audit

Feedback

Reporting Analysis / Evaluation ResultsGiving Advice on itiatives

Details of the Audit Procedure

Opinion Hearing

3

JPO’s Examination System / Quality Management System The four Examination Departments are divided into 38 examination divisions to conduct examinations

on each technical field. About 130 Directors are assigned to the units. In April 2014, 90 Quality Management Officers that conduct quality audits were assigned to the

Administrative Affairs Division. All of them were allocated to all of the examination divisions. In August 2014, the Subcommittee on Examination Quality Management consisting of 11 external

experts was established under the Intellectual Property Committee of the Industrial Structure Council, METI. The Subcommittee was designed to review and evaluate the current state of and the systems for quality management of the examination procedures at the JPO.

CommissionerDeputy Commissioner

Policy Planning and Coordination Department

Trademark and Customer

Relations Department

Patent and Design

Examination Department 1Patent and

Design Examination

Department 2

Patent and Design

Examination Department 3

Patent and Design

Examination Department 4

Trial and Appeal

Department

General Coordination

Division

Trademark Division

Design Division

Quality Management Office (management) (P) 　　

Quality Management Officer (audit) (P)

Examination Division

Internal Quality Management Committee

(Analysis)(P)

Subcommittee on Examination Quality Management

Japan Patent Office (JPO)

Intellectual Property Policy Committee of the Industrial Structure Council (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry)

Examination Division

Examination Division

Examination Division

Administrative Affairs Division

4

Quality Assurance of Patent Examinations (1)

ApprovalSubstantive and formality checks on examinations by Directors by checking notices prepared by examiners

Examiner Z

Directors are responsible for the quality of examinations for the technical fields for which they are in change.

Directors

Check the content of notices

Approval

Send back

Deficiencies

Examiner A

Send

Notices that need be corrected will be fed back to examiners.

All notices

Examiner B

5

Quality Assurance of Patent Examinations (2)

ConsultationExaminers share opinions with each other to share their expertise such as search know-how and knowledge that they have gained through from based on the knowledge and experience of all examiners. They do this in order to reduce discrepancies in terms of searches and decisions and conduct prompt and appropriate examinations.

Examiner in charge Examiner in consulting Examiner in charge

Examiner in consulting

Director in consulting

Types of consultations(1) Voluntary consultations(2) Obligatory consultations for cases that meet certain requirements.Example: straight-grant cases, i.e., cases in which examiners immediately decide to grant patents without sending notices of reasons for refusal(3) Consultations to be conducted on PCT applications based on standardized criteria using check sheets

Consultations are conducted between examiners of the same examination division, but in some cases, they are conducted with a Director or an examiner of another examination division.

Around 60,000 cases per year (in 2013)

6

Work Environment of Examination Division Supervised by Director

Associate Managing Examiner

DirectorManaging Examiner

The offices of the examination divisions are located in large rooms appropriate for conducting consultations with each other.

Group A

Group C

Group B

Group D

Group E

Space for group meeting

Achieving desirable work environment to encourage communications among examiners

3 to 4 Directors are allocated to each examination division.

The seating layout is by the group of examiners in the division. Certain space is allocated in the office for group discussions.

77

Feedback

Samplecheck

Quality Audit

Samplecheck

・ Check Drafts

・ Understands Invention

・ Searches・ Judges

・ Check Drafts

Deficiencies

Researchers in QMOwith no experience

in examination

Types of notices

Reasons of refusal

Examiner

Examiner

Examination Office A

Examination Office B

Examination Office Z

Quality Check (1)

Quality audit

Quality Management

Officersexperienced

in examination

Types of noticesISR/WO-ISA

Decision to Grant

8

Quality Check (2)

User Satisfaction Survey The JPO has been conducting its user satisfaction surveys since fiscal 2012. In fiscal 2014, 91.0% of users rated the JPO’s examination as 3 and higher on a scale of

5. Descriptions in notices of reasons of refusal, practices of inventive step, judgment

without discrepancy positively affected the overall evaluation. The survey implied the need to improve the JPO’s examination procedures in terms of

consistency in decisions, decisions on inventive step, and searches for foreign patent documents and non-patent documents.

The entire report for fiscal 2013 is available at http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou/toushin/chousa/h25_shinsa_user.htm.

Evaluation on the examination quality for domestic patent applications (FY 2014 User Satisfaction Survey)

Satisfied47.0%Neutral

44.0%

Dissatisfied8.9%

5. Satisfied 2.7%

4: Somewhat Satisfied 44.4%

3. Neutral44.0%

2: SomewhatDissatisfied

8.4%

1: Dissatisfied0.5%

 

SatisfiedDissatisfied

Important

Quality Check (3)

Analysis of Discrepancies of Search Results between the JPO and other IP OfficesAnalyze the factors for any discrepancies in search results between the JPO and other IP offices for cases in which the JPO prepared its international search reports (ISRs) and the JPO examined PPH applications as the office of Earlier Examination (OEE). The analysis is conducted based on the JPO’s examination standards.

Decision to grant patents

Cited only A documents

ISR

Decision

JPO

後続庁（ OLE ）

Foreign office =designated office

(DO)

Notice of reasons of refusal

Are there any cited documents that have been newly added?

Are cited documents able to deny novelty/inventive step based on the JPO’s examination standards?

What are the reasons for omissions in cited documents?

Feedback to the examination divisions and examiners in charge

YES

YES

YES

Office of Earlier Examination (OEE)

International Search Authority (ISA)

Notice of reasons of refusal

Foreign office =Office of Later

Examination (OLE)

10

Objective Evaluation and Check

Subcommittee on Examination Quality Management The Subcommittee consists of a wide range of external

experts from companies, legal communities, and academia, in order to further strengthen the JPO’s initiatives on quality management.

The Subcommittee objectively reviews and evaluates the current state of and the systems for quality management of the examination procedures from the perspective of experts, in order to propose major points the JPO needs to improve. Issues to be discussed for evaluations as follows:

Evaluation Items

(1) State of development of documents such as “Quality Policy” and “Quality Manual”;

(6) Initiatives to enhance the quality of examinations;

(2) Definiteness in procedures for examinations and quality management;

(7) Initiatives on quality checks;

(3) Publishing examination results to the public and notifying all examiners of them;

(8)Analysis on the quality of examinations and clear identification of issues

(4) Organizational structure for conducting higher quality examinations;

(9) Current state of improving policies, procedures, and organizational structures, i.e., (1) to (5) of the evaluation items, to achieve high quality examinations; and

(5) Organizational structure for quality management system;

(10) Initiatives to improve essential factors to achieve a better quality management system, i.e., (6) to (8) of the evaluation items.

11

Outline of proposed amendments to the Patent Act

12

Acceptance of Opinions on the Quality of Examinations

At the JPO, the Quality Management Office is accepting opinions from users on the quality of examinations through its website, and by telephone and facsimile, so as to enhance the quality of examinations.Here is a screen of the JPO website that is used to submit opinions.

Click!

Click!

User(Applicant/

Representative)JPOQuality

Management Office

ＮＥＷ

13

Thank youfor your kind attention!

ExaminedbyJapanPatent Office