1 / 6

Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPAC February 2010

Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPAC February 2010. Trademark Fee Cost Analysis - Objective. The Trademark Fee Cost Analysis is a joint effort between CFO and Trademarks to identify the actual cost of work performed for Trademark and TTAB Processing Fees.

eugenia-weber
Download Presentation

Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPAC February 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPACFebruary 2010

  2. Trademark Fee Cost Analysis - Objective • The Trademark Fee Cost Analysis is a joint effort between CFO and Trademarks to identify the actual cost of work performed for Trademark and TTAB Processing Fees. • OMB Circular A-25 requires Fee Studies to ensure costs are recovered by fees in the aggregate. • Objectives: • Revise existing Trademark and TTAB models to provide better cost information to support management decision making. • Develop a method for determining the cost per fee for all Trademark and TTAB processing fee codes, including both direct and indirect costs. • Use cost information for making management decisions including future fee setting.

  3. Accomplishments (since November meeting) • Successfully completed the revised Trademark ABI model with cost and workload information • Continued review of the FY2008 ABI model with both Trademarks and TTAB • Produced FY2009 ABI model • Populated multiple displays to present/validate data for FY2008 and FY2009 • Started using the revised ABI model in FY2010 financial reporting • Began populating FY2010 Quarter One displays

  4. Preliminary Observations • Electronic filings are cheaper to process than paper ones. • E-files allow for faster processing, better tracking and many other advantages not captured by cost data. • The processing costs of most paper filings exceed the fees; paper files are generally subsidized by electronic ones. • Renewals and SOU-extensions subsidize examination, petition, and TTAB. • Between 2008 and 2009 the largest cost variations affect small volume filings (paper files). The cost of a new paper application increased in 2009 because: • Paper applications represent a small fraction of filings yet have some high fixed costs (process mail, scanning...). • in 2009 new application filings went down more than 12% while paper ones went down about 40% (given our fixed costs, the paper unit cost surges). • The historical unit costs shown do not account for dissemination and multi-year investment costs (ten of millions of dollars).

  5. Next Steps • Incorporate TTAB updates into FY2008 and FY2009 fee unit cost results • Complete final review and validation • Develop briefing packages for broader review and executive presentations • Begin incorporating cost analysis results into larger USPTO Sustainable Funding Model plans: • Determine optimal Trademark operating reserve • Compare prospective budget requirements and costs compared to current fee rates

  6. Questions… Thank you!

More Related