0651-USPTO-Information-Quality-Guidelines-Dec2009

Information Quality Guidelines

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Home

An Agency of the Department of Commerce

Help

Site Index

Contact Us

SEARCH:
HOW DO I:

About USPTO
Home Page

Patents

Trademarks

Products & Services

IP Law & Policy

Products & Services

Customer Information Services

Product Catalog

Careers

Inventors

go

--Select
an Option
Select
an -Option

News & Notices

-

eBusiness/Alerts

go

FAQs

For Kids

Information Quality Guidelines

Information Quality Guidelines

Locate Libraries
Training/Events
Customer Information Services
Information Quality Guidelines
New Products
Product & Service Updates
Data Files

Downloads
2007 Product and Services Catalog
2009 Addendum
Detailed Calendar Year and
Retrospective Data Product
Descriptions

Links
Official Gazette - Patents
Official Gazette - Trademarks
Product Catalog
New Products
Assistance Centers
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Events
Copy / Document Sales

I. BACKGROUND

The United States Congress recognized a need to improve the quality of information disseminated to the public
by the Federal Government.  In Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554; H.R. 5658) Congress directed the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to issue, by September 30, 2001, government-wide guidelines that “provide policy and procedural
guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of
information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies.”  OMB issued proposed
information quality guidelines, which were published in the Federal Register on June 28, 2001 (Vol. 66, No.
125, pp. 34489-34493).  After public comment and revision, OMB issued final information quality guidelines in
the Federal Register on September 28, 2001 (Vol. 66, No. 189, pp. 49718-49725).  In the OMB final
information quality guidelines issued in September 2001, OMB requested additional public comment on the
“capable of being substantially reproduced” standard and the related definition of “influential, scientific, or
statistical information” (paragraphs V.3.B, V.9, and V.10), which were issued on an interim final basis.  The
OMB final information quality guidelines were published in the Federal Register on January 3, 2002 (Vol. 67,
No. 2, pp. 369-378); corrected on February 5, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 24, pg. 5365); and reprinted in their entirety
February 22, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 36, pp. 8451-8460).  Federal agencies subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) were directed by OMB to (A) issue their own guidelines ensuring and maximizing the
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including statistical information) disseminated by the
agency; (B) establish administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of
information maintained and disseminated by the agency; (C) report periodically to the Director of OMB – (i) the
number and nature of complaints received by the agency regarding the accuracy of information disseminated
by the agency and; (ii) how such complaints were handled by the agency.
Pursuant to the OMB information quality guidelines, the USPTO published a Federal Register Notice of
Availability on May 2, 2002 (Vol. 67, No.85, pg. 22052), requesting public comment on the “Proposed
guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information disseminated
by the USPTO”.  The proposed USPTO information quality guidelines were posted on the USPTO website in the
News & Notices section from April 30, 2002 – May 31, 2002.
During the public comment period (May 1, 2002 – May 31, 2002) on the proposed USPTO information quality
guidelines, the USPTO received six sets of comments.  All six sets of comments were reviewed and considered
in the preparation of the final USPTO information quality guidelines.
II. INTRODUCTION

After OMB review, USPTO consideration of OMB comments, and appropriate revision; these final USPTO
information quality guidelines implement Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554; H.R. 5658) and fulfill the OMB requirements published in the
Federal Register February 22, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 36, pp. 8451-8460).  The USPTO collaborated closely with the
Department of Commerce (DOC) in preparing these independent guidelines.  This document may be revised
periodically and re-disseminated, based upon direction from OMB, evolving requirements at the USPTO, or
concerns expressed by the public.  Effective October 1, 2002, information disseminated by the USPTO will
comply with all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.
In implementing the USPTO information quality guidelines, the USPTO acknowledges that improving the quality
of information is an important management objective that takes its place alongside other USPTO objectives,
such as ensuring the success of USPTO missions, observing budget and resource priorities and constraints, and
providing useful information to the public in a timely manner.  The USPTO intends to implement these
guidelines in a way that will achieve all of these objectives in a harmonious way.
III. MILESTONES

April 1, 2002 (extended to May 1, 2002 by OMB): Federal agencies must publish a notice of
availability of their proposed information quality guidelines in the Federal Register , and post the proposed
information quality guidelines on the agency’s website, to provide an opportunity for public comment.
July 1, 2002 (extended to August 8, 2002 by OMB):  Federal agencies upon consideration of public
comment and after appropriate revision, must submit revised information quality guidelines to OMB for
review regarding consistency with the OMB guidelines.
September 16, 2002:  Federal agencies upon consideration of the OMB specific agency comments, the
September 5, 2002 OMB memorandum, and after appropriate revision, must electronic mail (e-mail) their
second draft of the final information quality guidelines to OMB for a second review regarding consistency
with the OMB guidelines.
October 1, 2002:  Federal agencies upon consideration of OMB comments and after appropriate revision,
must publish a notice of availability of their final information quality guidelines in the Federal Register , and
post the final information quality guidelines on the agency’s website.

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
October 1, 2002 (continued):  Federal agencies’ information quality guidelines become effective. 
Federal agencies’ must conduct pre-dissemination review of information that the agency first disseminates
on or after the effective date.  In addition, Federal agencies’ must allow the public to seek correction of
agency maintained or disseminated information that does not comply with the OMB or agency’s information
quality guidelines.
January 1, 2004: The first annual fiscal-year 2003 report under the Information Quality Act to the
Director of OMB is due covering the complaints, appeals, and resolutions from October 1, 2002 –
September 30, 2003.
January 1, 2005: The second annual fiscal-year 2004 report under the Information Quality Act to the
Director of OMB is due covering the complaints, appeals, and resolutions from October 1, 2003 –
September 30, 2004.
January 1, 2006: The third annual fiscal-year 2005 report under the Information Quality Act to the
Director of OMB is due covering the complaints, appeals, and resolutions from October 1, 2004 –
September 30, 2005.
December 15, 2006: The fourth annual fiscal-year 2006 report under the Information Quality Act and
the first annual fiscal-year 2006 report under the Peer Review Bulletin to the Director of OMB are due
covering the complaints, appeals, resolutions, and peer reviews from October 1, 2005 – September 30,
2006.
December 17, 2007: The fifth annual fiscal-year 2007 report under the Information Quality Act and the
second annual fiscal-year 2007 report under the Peer Review Bulletin to the Director of OMB are due
covering the complaints, appeals, resolutions, and peer reviews from October 1, 2006 – September 30,
2007.
December 15, 2008: The sixth annual fiscal-year 2008 report under the Information Quality Act and the
third annual fiscal-year 2008 report under the Peer Review Bulletin to the Director of OMB are due
covering the complaints, appeals, resolutions, and peer reviews from October 1, 2007 – September 30,
2008.
NOTE: USPTO annual fiscal-year reports are filed through the Department of Commerce (DOC) and are
available from the DOC website:  
http://www.ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/Information_Quality/DEV01_003768

IV. DEFINITIONS

A. The definitions below are from the OMB information quality guidelines and apply throughout the USPTO
information quality guidelines.
1. “Dissemination” means agency initiated or sponsored distribution of information to the public. 
Dissemination does not include:  distribution to government employees or agency contractors or
grantees; intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government information; and responses to requests
for agency records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory
Committee Act or other similar law.  This definition also does not include:  distribution of
correspondence with individuals or persons, press releases, archival records, public filings, subpoenas
or adjudicative processes.
a. “Agency initiated distribution of information to the public” refers to information that the
agency distributes or releases which reflects, represents, or forms any part of the support of the
policies of the agency.  In addition, if the agency, as an institution, distributes or releases information
prepared by an outside party in a manner that reasonably suggests that the agency agrees with the
information, this would be considered agency initiated distribution and hence agency dissemination
because of the appearance of having the information represent agency views.  By contrast, the agency
does not “initiate” the dissemination of information when an agency employee, contractor, subcontractor, or grantee publishes and communicates their respective research findings in the same
manner as their colleagues, even if the agency retains ownership or other intellectual property rights
because the Federal government paid for the research.
b. “Agency sponsored distribution of information to the public” refers to situations where the
agency has directed a third party to distribute or release information, or where the agency has the
authority to review and approve the information before release.  By contrast, if the agency simply
provides funding to support research, and if the researcher (not the agency) decides whether to
distribute the results and – if the results are to be released – determines the content and presentation
of the distribution, then the agency has not “sponsored” the dissemination even though it has funded
the research and even if the agency retains ownership or other intellectual property rights because the
Federal government paid for the research.  Note that subsequent agency dissemination of such
information would require that the information adhere to the agency’s information quality guidelines
even if it was initially covered by a disclaimer.
2. “Government information” means information created, collected, processed, disseminated, or
disposed of by or for the Federal Government.
3. “Influential”, when used in the phrase “influential scientific, financial, or statistical information”,
means information that will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public
policies or important private sector decisions.
4. “Information” means any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts or data, in
any medium or form, including textual, numerical, graphic, cartographic, narrative, or audiovisual
forms.  This definition includes information that an agency disseminates from a web page, but does not
include the provision of hyperlinks to information that others disseminate.  This definition does not
include opinions, where the agency’s presentation makes it clear that what is being offered is
someone’s opinion rather than fact or the agency’s views.
5. “Information dissemination product” means any books, paper, map, machine-readable material,
audiovisual production, or other documentary material, regardless of physical form or characteristic, an
agency disseminates to the public.  This definition includes any electronic document, optical disc (i.e.,
CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, etc.), or web page.
6. “Quality” is an encompassing term comprising objectivity , utility, and integrity.  These guidelines

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
sometimes refer to these three statutory terms collectively as “quality”.
a. “Objectivity” involves two distinct elements, presentation and substance.  The presentation
element includes whether disseminated information is being presented in an accurate, clear, complete,
unbiased manner, and within a proper context.  Sometimes, in disseminating certain types of
information to the public, other information must be disseminated in order to ensure an accurate,
complete, and unbiased presentation.  Sources of the disseminated information (to the extent possible,
consistent with confidentiality protections) and, in a scientific, or statistical context, the supporting data
and models need to be identified, so that the public can assess for itself whether there may be some
reason to question the objectivity of the sources.  Where appropriate, supporting data shall have full,
accurate, transparent documentation, and error sources affecting data quality shall be identified and
disclosed to users.  The substance element focuses on ensuring accurate, reliable, and unbiased
information.  In a scientific, or statistical context, the original or supporting data shall be generated,
and the analytical results shall be developed, using sound statistical and research methods.  If the
results have been subject to formal, independent, external peer review, the information can generally
be considered of acceptable objectivity.  In those situations involving influential scientific or statistical
information, the results must be capable of being substantially reproduced, if the original or supporting
data are independently analyzed using the same models.  Reproducibility does not mean that the
original or supporting data have to be capable of being replicated through new experiments, samples,
or tests.  Making the data and models publicly available will assist in determining whether analytical
results are capable of being substantially reproduced.  However, these guidelines do not alter the
otherwise applicable standards and procedures for determining when and how information is disclosed. 
Thus, the objectivity standard does not override other compelling interests, such as privacy, trade
secrets, and other confidentiality protections.
b. “Utility” refers to the usefulness of the information to its intended users, including the public.  In
assessing the usefulness of information that the agency disseminates to the public, the agency
considers the uses of the information not only from its own perspective but also from the perspective
of the public.
c. “Integrity” refers to the security of information – the protection of information from unauthorized
access or revision, to ensure that the information is not compromised through corruption or
falsification.
7. “Reproducibility” means that the information is capable of being substantially reproduced, subject to
an acceptable degree of imprecision.  For information judged to have more (less) important impacts,
the degree of imprecision that is tolerated is reduced (increased).  With respect to analytical results,
“capable of being substantially reproduced” means that independent analysis of the original or
supporting data using identical methods would generate similar analytical results, subject to an
acceptable degree of imprecision or error.
B.   The definitions below are not from the OMB information quality guidelines, and apply throughout the USPTO
information quality guidelines:
1. “Affected person” is any individual who uses, benefits from, or is harmed by the disseminated
information at issue.
2. “Business unit” is a sub-organization of the USPTO responsible for carrying out specified substantive
functions (i.e., program area).
3. “General Information” is a category of information that the USPTO maintains or disseminates.  It
includes anything that is not patent or trademark related.
4. “Patents” is a category of information that the USPTO maintains or disseminates.  It includes patent
applications, patent grants, and patent related documents.
5. “Person” is an individual, partnership, corporation, association, public or private organization, or State
or local government.
6. “Pre-Dissemination Review ” is a process for reviewing the quality (including the objectivity, utility,
and integrity) of information before it is disseminated.
7. “Trademarks” is a category of information that the USPTO maintains or disseminates.  It includes
trademark applications, registered trademarks, and trademark related documents.
V. INTENT

The USPTO is fully committed to ensuring and maximizing the quality of information that it disseminates and
fully supports the idea of basic information quality standards established in the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35) (PRA), in OMB Circular A-130, and in the OMB information quality guidelines.  The USPTO
will establish a basic standard of quality (including objectivity, utility, and integrity) as a performance goal by
adopting the OMB information quality guidelines and will take appropriate steps to incorporate information
quality criteria into agency information dissemination practices.
The USPTO information quality guidelines are intended to improve the quality of the information disseminated
by the USPTO to the public by formalizing the existing pre-dissemination review processes, and establishing a
new administrative mechanism with a feedback loop, “allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction
of information maintained and disseminated by the agency”.  They are not intended to be, and should not be
construed as, legally binding regulations or mandates.  As such, these guidelines do not create any right or
benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity, by any party against the United States; or the
USPTO, to include its Director, employees, contractors, sub-contractors, grantees, or any person(s).
Historically, a variety of mechanisms for achieving basic information quality standards for patent and trademark
information have been maintained at the USPTO.  The information quality guidelines described in this
document complement any pre-existing administrative mechanisms, guidelines, or procedures at the USPTO. 
All pre-existing administrative mechanisms, guidelines, and procedures for achieving information quality remain
in place.
Specifically, for errors not covered by these guidelines, the USPTO has administrative mechanisms, guidelines,
and procedures in place to correct or change patent applications, patent grants, trademark applications, and

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
registered trademarks (some examples follow).  Full details of the procedures are available in the Manual of
Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) and the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) both available
on the USPTO Website at:  http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.html and
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/tac/tmep/index.html

Certificates of Correction (35 U.S.C. 254 and 255; 15 U.S.C. 1057).  Certificates of Correction are used
to correct typographical errors and misspellings in patent grants and trademark registrations but cannot be
used to add new matter.
Disclaimers (35 U.S.C. 253).  The patentee may disclaim one or more claims of his/her patent by filing a
disclaimer with the USPTO.
Reissues (35 U.S.C. 251).  If defects are found in the original patent, the patentee may apply for a
reissue patent with proposed changes to correct these errors.  Following an examination, a reissue patent
may be granted to replace the original for the balance of the un-expired term.  However, the nature of the
changes that can be made by means of the reissue are rather limited; new matter cannot be added.
Additionally, a new procedure “allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information
maintained and disseminated by the agency” will be in place by October 1, 2002, and shall apply to information
that is maintained or disseminated on or after October 1, 2002.
VI. SCOPE
A. USPTO SPECIFIC EXEMPTIONS:  The following types of information maintained or
disseminated by the USPTO are not subject to the USPTO information quality guidelines or
requests for correction:
1. Public Filings – The content of public filings and any errors in the documents as received are not within
the scope of these guidelines.  There are independent administrative or legal processes in place that
permit correction of errors in these publicly filed documents.  However, data entry errors or scanning
errors committed by USPTO personnel or contractors that result in the substance of a public filing being
inaccurately disseminated are subject to these guidelines.  Public filings include but are not limited to:
1. Patent Applications
2. Patent Assignments
3. Patent Petitions
4. Trademark Applications
5. Trademark Assignments
6. Trademark Petitions
2. Adjudicative Processes – Documents developed as a result of adjudicative processes have independent
legal significance and any errors in the documents themselves are not within the scope of these
guidelines.  There are independent administrative or legal processes in place that permit correction of
errors in these adjudicative documents.  However, data entry errors or scanning errors committed by
USPTO personnel or contractors that result in the substance of an adjudicative document being
inaccurately disseminated are subject to these guidelines.  Adjudicative documents include but are not
limited to:
a.   Patent Grants
b.   Registered Trademarks
B. GENERAL EXEMPTIONS:  The following types of information maintained or disseminated by the
USPTO are not subject to the USPTO information quality guidelines or requests for correction:

1. Information with distribution intended for government employees or USPTO contractors, subcontractors, or grantees.
2. Information with distribution intended for intra- or inter-agency use or sharing of government
information.
3. Responses to requests for USPTO records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Privacy
Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act or other similar law.
4. Information from adjudicative processes, such as pleadings, including information developed during the
conduct of any criminal or civil action or administrative enforcement action, investigation or audit
against specific parties, or information distributed in documents for an administrative action
determining the rights and liabilities of specific parties under applicable statutes and regulations.
5. Information with distribution intended as correspondence with individuals or persons, regardless of
media, to include but not limited to:  electronic mail (e-mail), facsimiles, U.S. Mail, Airmail, or overnight
courier packages.
6. Press releases, press conferences, press materials or similar communications in any medium that
announce, support the announcement, or give public notice of information the USPTO has disseminated
elsewhere.
7. Subpoenas.
8. Solicitations (e.g., program announcements, vacancy announcements, requests for proposals).
9. Archival records or archival information disseminated by the USPTO before October 1, 2002, and still
maintained by the USPTO as archival material.  This includes Patent and Trademark Depository Library
holdings.
10. Hyperlinks to information that others disseminate, as well as paper-based information from other
sources referenced, but not approved or endorsed by the USPTO.
11. Policy manuals and management information produced for the internal management and operations of
the USPTO, and not intended for public dissemination.
12. Information presented to Congress as part of legislative or oversight processes, such as testimony of
USPTO officials, and information or drafting assistance provided to Congress in connection with
proposed or pending legislation that is not simultaneously disseminated to the public.  However,
information that would otherwise be covered by applicable guidelines is not exempted from compliance
merely because it is presented to Congress.

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
13. Documents not authored by the USPTO and not intended to represent the USPTO’s views, including
information authored and distributed by USPTO grantees, as long as the documents are not
disseminated (See Definitions, Section IV.A.1.a.b.) by the USPTO.
14. Research data, findings, reports and other materials published or otherwise distributed by USPTO
employees, contractors, sub-contractors, or grantees that are identified as not representing the USPTO
views.
VII. USPTO STANDARD OF QUALITY FOR DISSEMINATED INFORMATION

The objectivity, utility, and integrity standards below are for the three categories of information that the USPTO
disseminates:  Patents , Trademarks , and General Information (See Definitions, Section IV.B.(3., 4., and 7.)).
A. OBJECTIVITY
Objectivity involves presentation and substance.  Presentation focuses on disseminating information in an
accurate, clear, complete, unbiased manner, and within a proper context.  Substance focuses on ensuring
accurate, reliable, and unbiased information.
The majority of information that the USPTO disseminates consists of public filings or adjudicative documents,
the substance of which is exempt from these guidelines.  The USPTO controls the accuracy of this information
through independent administrative or legal processes, (See the MPEP or TMEP), that permit correction of
errors and ensure the substance of these documents is accurately disseminated.
The USPTO’s information dissemination products are listed and described in the “USPTO Products and Services
Catalog from the USPTO Information Dissemination Services” available on the USPTO website at the following
address:  http://www.uspto.gov/products/catalog/index.jsp.
Historically, a pre-dissemination review process of all USPTO information disseminated is incorporated into the
normal process of formulating the information.  This review is at a level appropriate to the information, taking
into account the information's importance, balanced against the resources required and the time available to
conduct the review.  The USPTO’s business units treat information quality as integral to every step of the
USPTO’s development of information, including creation, collection, maintenance, and dissemination.  The
USPTO receives and relies on feedback from both internal and external customers if the accuracy or
completeness of the information disseminated is below standard.  Corrective measures are taken immediately to
limit the impact and re-disseminate the corrected information.  In an unbiased manner, the USPTO makes
every effort to provide complete databases on the USPTO website of all patents and trademarks that have ever
been captured electronically.  All USPTO information dissemination products are labeled and initially distributed
with the accompanying file specifications for clarity and proper context.  Several file specifications are available
on the USPTO website.  The USPTO reliably disseminates patent grants, trademark applications, and registered
trademarks every Tuesday and disseminates patent applications every Thursday (excluding Federal holidays).
“Influential Information” disseminated by the USPTO, or information that will have or does have clear and
substantial impact on important public policies or important private sector decisions consists primarily of
statistical information on USPTO filings and operations.  “Reproducibility” of these analytic results does include
“especially rigorous robustness checks” and when asked the USPTO does provide disclosure of the data sources
that have been used and the specific quantitative methods and assumptions (if any) that have been employed. 
Patent applications, patent grants, trademark applications, and registered trademarks while influential are
exempt from these guidelines as discussed above in (Scope, Section VI.).
“Financial Information”, the USPTO adopts and follows all applicable Federal government financial procedures,
rules, and laws and uses commonly accepted accounting practices, and independent accounting firms.
Regarding “Analysis of Risks to Human Health, Safety and the Environment”, the USPTO currently does not
disseminate influential information that constitutes assessment of risks to human health, safety, or the
environment.  Therefore, the USPTO is not required to adopt as an objectivity standard the principles of the
Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of 1996 (SDWA) respecting risk assessments.
Regarding “Third-Party Information”, the USPTO currently does not disseminate third-party information.  Thirdparty information sources are not directly subject to the OMB or USPTO information quality guidelines. 
However, if in the future the USPTO develops information products or forms the basis of a decision or policy on
third-party information, the third-party information must be of known quality and consistent with all applicable
OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.  When such information is used, any limitations,
assumptions, collection methods, or uncertainties concerning it are taken into account and disclosed.
B. UTILITY
Utility means that disseminated information is useful to its intended users, including the public. "Useful" means
that the content of the information is helpful, beneficial, or serviceable to its intended users, or that the
information supports the usefulness of other disseminated information by making it more accessible or easier to
read, see, understand, obtain, or use.
The USPTO strives to continually improve the usefulness of its information products and the manner in which
they are disseminated.  The USPTO is a global organization, and has customers worldwide.  The USPTO
interacts with its customers through users’ groups, open forums, customer focus sessions, meetings,
workshops, surveys, product reviews, and other mechanisms to assess and improve the utility and accessibility
of its products.
The USPTO disseminates information products in a manner that allows them to be accessible and
understandable to a broad range of users.  The USPTO meets the needs of its customers by disseminating
information through a variety of media including but not limited to:  USPTO Website, electronically by File
Transfer Protocol (FTP), optical disc (i.e., CD-ROM, DVD-ROM, etc.), floppy disk, magnetic tape, facsimile, and
paper.  The USPTO also utilizes international standards for patent and trademark information, and other
standard data formats to ensure information is usable by a broad spectrum of users with varying computer
equipment, operating systems, and software.
C. INTEGRITY
Integrity equates to security.  Regardless of the distribution media, USPTO information is safeguarded before,

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
during, and after dissemination from improper access, modification, or destruction, to a degree commensurate
with the risk and magnitude of harm that could result from the loss, misuse, or unauthorized access to or
modification of such information.
All electronic information disseminated to the public by the USPTO adheres to the standards set out in Appendix
III, “Security of Automated Information Resources,” OMB Circular A-130, the Government Information Security
Reform Act, the Computer Security Act, the computer security provisions in the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. Chapter 35) (PRA), and the Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act.  Compliance with the above
standards or guidelines is detailed in the USPTO’s Automated Information System Security Controls Manual.
Confidentiality of personal data collected by the USPTO is safeguarded under legislation, the Privacy Act and
Titles 13, 15, and 22 of the U.S. Code.  The Privacy Policy Statement for the USPTO is available on the USPTO
Website at: http://www.uspto.gov/privact.jsp.

VIII. PRE-DISSEMINATION REVIEW PROCESS

All business units within the USPTO must incorporate the following pre-dissemination review process that
applies to information disseminated on or after October 1, 2002.
Information quality is an integral part of the pre-dissemination review of information disseminated by the
USPTO.  Information quality is also integral to information collections conducted by the USPTO, and is
incorporated into the clearance process required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) (PRA)
to help improve the quality of information that the USPTO collects and disseminates to the public.  The USPTO
is already required to demonstrate in their PRA submissions to OMB the “practical utility” of a proposed
collection of information that they plan to disseminate.  Additionally, for all proposed collections of information
that will be disseminated to the public, the USPTO should demonstrate in their PRA clearance submissions to
OMB that the proposed collection of information will result in information that will be collected, maintained, and
used in a way consistent with all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.
Pre-dissemination review can be accomplished in a number of ways (including but not limited to combinations
of the following):
a. Active personal review of information by supervisors and managers, either by reviewing each individual
document, or selected samples, or by any other reasonable method.
b. Use of quality check lists, charts, statistics, or other means of tracking quality, completeness, and
usefulness.
c. Process design and monitoring to ensure that the process itself imposes checks on information quality.
d. Review during information preparation.
e. Use of management controls.
f. Any other method that serves to enhance the accuracy, reliability, and objectivity of the information.
IX. BUSINESS UNIT RESPONSIBILITIES

Business units within the USPTO will be responsible for agency compliance with the final USPTO information
quality guidelines, appoint individuals to be points-of-contact, make decisions regarding the corrective action to
be taken, and decide appeals.  The business units will be required to update or close problem ticket records
with decisions or steps taken to resolution and communicate the decisions to the affected person(s) via
electronic mail (e-mail) or U.S. Postal Service.
X. CIO RESPONSIBILITIES

The Chief Information Officer of the USPTO will be responsible for the administrative mechanisms to track
complaints, appeals, resolutions; and on a fiscal-year basis, submit a report to the Director of OMB providing
information (both quantitative and qualitative, where appropriate) on the number and nature of complaints
received by the agency regarding agency compliance with the OMB information quality guidelines and how
such complaints were resolved.
XI. AFFECTED PERSON RESPONSIBILITIES

A.  Requests to correct information maintained and disseminated by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
(USPTO) that are subject to all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.
1. Any affected person may request, where appropriate, correction of USPTO information that does not
comply with all applicable OMB and (these) USPTO information quality guidelines.  The burden is on
the affected person to show both the necessity for correction and type of correction sought.
Additionally, the affected person has the burden of rebutting the presumption that information
subjected to formal, independent peer review is objective.  Any affected person may submit a request
directly to the USPTO, in accordance with the procedures contained in these guidelines.
2. Initial requests for correction of USPTO information must first be made through the USPTO Contact
Center (UCC) Help Desk for tracking and reporting purposes.  The UCC Help Desk will route requests to
the appropriate business unit within the USPTO.
3. All requests must be made using one of the following methods:
a. Electronic Mail:
[email protected]
Please include “Data Quality” in the Subject Line.

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
b. U.S. Postal Service:
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Mail Stop USPTO Contact Center (UCC)
ATTN:  Data Quality
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
U.S.A.
4. A request for correction of USPTO disseminated information will not be considered under these
guidelines concerning:
a. A matter not involving “information”, as that term is defined in (Section IV.A.4.).
b. Information that has not actually been “disseminated”, as that term is defined in (Section
IV.A.1.a.b.).
c. Disseminated information the correction of which would serve no useful purpose.
d. Requests that are duplicative, repetitious, or frivolous may be rejected.  This does not preclude a
request for correction alleging a recurring or systemic problem resulting in repeated similar or
consistent errors.
5. Initial requests for correction must include:
a. requester’s name
b. requester’s telephone number
c. requester’s electronic mail (e-mail) address (optional if submitting by U.S. Postal Service, or
overnight courier)
d. requester’s return address (required only if submitting by U.S. Postal Service, or overnight courier)
e. an accurate citation to and a description of the particular information disseminated that is the
subject of the request for correction (For recurring or systemic errors, please provide a few examples
(no more than 50)).
f.  an explanation of:
i. how the requester is affected by the alleged error
ii. how the information at issue fails to comply with (these) USPTO information quality guidelines or the
applicable OMB guidelines
iii. why the requester believes that the disseminated information is not correct
6. Affected persons will be given a problem ticket number for each request via one of the following
methods:  electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S. Postal Service.
7. For proper requests (i.e., requests that include all applicable elements of (Section XI.A.5. above)), the
business unit will notify the requester via electronic mail (e-mail), or U.S. Postal Service of the initial
decision within 60 calendar days after receipt of the request with an appropriate explanation of the
decision being made.  If the request requires more than 60 calendar days to resolve, the business unit
will inform the requester within the first 60 calendar days that more time is required indicating the
reason why more time is required and an estimated decision date.
8. If a problem ticket gets misdirected to the wrong USPTO business unit, additional effort will be taken
by the USPTO to identify and route the problem ticket to the appropriate business unit.  Once the
misdirected problem ticket gets to the appropriate business unit, the business unit will have 60
calendar days from receipt to respond to the requester via electronic mail (e-mail), telephone, or U.S.
Postal Service.
9. A proper request received concerning information disseminated as part of and during the pendency of
the comment period on a proposed rule, plan, or other action, including a request concerning the
information forming the record of decision for such proposed rule, plan or action will be treated as a
comment filed on that proposed rulemaking, plan, or action, and be addressed in the issuance of any
final rule, plan, or action.  However, where the requester demonstrates immediate actual harm or the
substantial likelihood of actual harm arising from that dissemination prior to issuance of the final rule,
plan, or action, the USPTO will provide a timely response before issuing the final rule, plan or action, if
doing so will not significantly delay the issuance of the final rule, plan, or action.
10. For improper requests (i.e., requests that do not include all applicable elements of (Section XI.A.5.
above) or contain errors), the requester will be contacted and notified of the omission or error within
60 calendar days.  The requester has the option of amending or correcting the problem ticket record by
contacting the UCC Help Desk.  If the original request is not amended or corrected, the USPTO will
close the problem ticket.  If the requester cannot be contacted because of an omission or error, the
problem ticket will be closed.  All requests will be counted in the USPTO’s annual fiscal year report to
OMB.
11. If the USPTO decides not to correct the disseminated information, then the affected person may appeal
that decision within 60 calendar days.  The appeal will follow the same path as Initial Requests, with
the following exceptions:
a. Upon receipt of an initial adverse decision (not to correct), the initial requester has 60 calendar days
to submit an appeal.  The appeal should be submitted according to (Section XI.A.5. above). 
Additionally, the appeal should include a statement of the reason(s) why the requester believes the
initial adverse decision was incorrect.
b. To maintain continuity, the USPTO requires the problem ticket number from the initial request.  The
original problem ticket will be reopened/updated to reflect an appeal and assigned to the next highest
organizational level.
c. If the appeal requester is not able to provide the previous problem ticket number, then the request
will be considered an initial request and not an appeal.  A new problem ticket number will be assigned
by the UCC Help Desk.
d. The designated person at the next highest organizational level will notify the appeal requester via
electronic mail (e-mail) or U.S. Postal Service of the appeal decision within 60 calendar days after
receipt of the appeal with an appropriate explanation of the decision being made.  If the appeal
requires more than 60 calendar days to resolve, the business unit will inform the requester within the
first 60 calendar days that more time is required indicating the reason why more time is required and
an estimated decision date.

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]

Information Quality Guidelines
12. No opportunity for personal appearance, oral argument, or hearing on appeal is provided.

XII. USPTO Bulletin for Peer Review

http://www.uspto.gov/main/policy/infoquality_peer.htm

XIII. Additional Information

For additional information regarding the final USPTO Information Quality Guidelines Contact:
Ted Parr – Director, Public Information Services Group
[email protected]
(703) 756-1267
Christopher Leithiser – IT Specialist, Electronic Information Products Division
[email protected]
(703) 756-1244
Electronic Mail:
[email protected]
Facsimile:
Electronic Information Products Division
ATTN:  Data Quality
(571) 273-0110
U.S. Postal Service:
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Electronic Information Products Division
ATTN:  Data Quality
Randolph Square
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA  22313-1450

Accessibility

Federal Activities Inventory
Reform (FAIR) Act

Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA)

Strategy Targeting Organized
Piracy (STOP!)

Security

Notification and Federal
Employee Antidiscrimination
and Retaliation (NoFEAR) Act

Department of Commerce
NoFEAR Act Report

Copyright & Publication
Guidelines

Emergencies/Security Alerts

Budget & Performance

Regulations.gov

Department of Commerce

STOP!Fakes.gov

USPTO Webmaster

Privacy Policy
Terms of Use

Last Modified: 12/30/2009 6:49:39 AM

http://www.uspto.gov/products/cis/infoqualityguide.jsp[5/26/2010 12:45:55 PM]