Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Status Briefing #2 – Public August 28, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Simplification & Harmonization: Joint Programming S&H Roll Out Countries Pakistan 28 – 29 July 2003.
Advertisements

Project Management Concepts
FCMAT Response & Preparation: Process Outline October 25, 2006.
Hubbard County, Minn. Classification and Compensation Study Update GREG MANGOLD| AUGUST 5, 2014.
General Permits Schedule Update Water Quality Partnership Meeting May 19, 2005 Dewey Weaver.
EmpowHR 9.0 Upgrade Status Meeting Thursday, June 12, :30 A.M. – 4:00 P.M. (EDT)
Chubaka Producciones Presenta :.
2012 JANUARY Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 Evaluation Results Independent Review of the USPTO Activity Based Information Program and Methodology Presented to TPAC - August 28, 2009.
Project Management Module 3. Keep focused on the timeline Week Prepare for Kick-off Meeting Assign teams Team forming Review and execute.
Project Work and Administration
Prepared by: Harvard University, Office of the UCIO Harvard University IT Services Integration Initiative Program Management Planning Meeting January 10,
project management office(PMO)
Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPAC November 2009.
Office of Chief Financial Officer Report USPTO Trademark Public Advisory Committee February 19-20, 2009.
Slide: 1 27 th CEOS Plenary |Montréal | November 2013 Agenda Item: 15 Chu ISHIDA(JAXA) on behalf of Rick Lawford, GEO Water CoP leader GEO Water.
Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Briefing June 9, 2009.
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences Michael R. Fleming Chief Administrative Patent Judge United States Patent and Trademark Office.
The Microsoft Office 2007 Enterprise Project Management Solution:
Systems Update February, ICD10 AHCCCS ICD10 Project Milestones –Complete Requirements and Design – Reference; December 2012 –Begin Coding – Reference;
Great River Energy 2013 Annual True-Up Meeting August 7, 2014.
“Reaching across Arizona to provide comprehensive quality health care for those in need” Our first care is your health care Arizona Health Care Cost Containment.
Budget Setting Process For 2015 Budget Draft 0.1 Member Forum Date of Meeting: 27th May 2014.
Davenport University Strategic Planning, Goal Development and Budget Process December 15, 2009.
U.S. Department of Agriculture eGovernment Program February 5, 2003 eGovernment Working Group Meeting Chris Niedermayer, USDA eGovernment Executive.
ENL1819T Progress Report Confidence in Our Success.
Objectives: Develop a solution to either enhance or replace the FasTrak tool Scope/Why is this important?: Increase the transparency for issues that are.
Action Plans for Test Development and Administration STANAG 6001 BILC Conference, Mons, SHAPE, Belgium, September 2013 Ludmila Ianovici-Pascal Head, Language.
SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT
PRIME MINISTRY REPUBLIC OF TURKEY TURKISH STATISTICAL INSTITUTE Foreign Relations Department Projects Group TurkStat Meeting of the Policy Group on Statistical.
DATE POWER 2 INCOME JANUARY 100member X 25.00P2, FEBRUARY 200member X 25.00P5, MARCH 400member X 25.00P10, APRIL 800member.
OCFO - Financial Status of USPTO May 7, FY 2010 Status Authorized level of $1,887.0 million Mid-year Budget Execution Review currently underway.
Orientation and Summer Institutes Implementer’s Forum October 2005 Susan Barrett PBIS Maryland.
Test status report Test status report is important to track the important project issues, accomplishments of the projects, pending work and milestone analysis(
2011 Calendar Important Dates/Events/Homework. SunSatFriThursWedTuesMon January
NDIA PMCS May Rosslyn, VA Earned Value Management System Acceptance Working Group Buddy Everage Working Group Lead.
Expiring Lines Update SAC July 24, Agenda  Current Situation  NBS Final Close Program  Revised YE Schedule 2.
Community Engagement to Advance Mitigation Action.
© 2013 Gartner, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Gartner is a registered trademark of Gartner, Inc. or its affiliates. The Value Review.
Strategic Planning Deanna Herwald Vice President-Quality Management Systems.
NON-ACADEMIC POLICY TIMELINE For February 2010 Policies of great importance or policies that relate to a University regulation may need to go to the BOT.
July 2007 SundayMondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFridaySaturday
FY17 TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSMENT OVERVIEW For the Customer Liaison/Training Point of Contact.
Geospatial Line of Business FGDC Steering Committee Meeting October 24, 2007.
DOE Mini-Review Summary and Management Updates Mark Palmer Fermilab March 15, 2013.
2013 Annual True-Up Meeting
Evaluation of FY12 Tracking and FY13 Planning Process
FY2017 Mid-Year Review FY2018 Budget Planning
Quality Update – Data Migration
FY16 Budget Build (Banner)
Foothill College Accreditation Self-Study Update
Potential Milestones A timeline to finish in one year
UI Tax Project Department of Workforce Solutions
Strategic Plan FY 2019 – FY 2023 Update.
Gulf of Honduras Task Group 1 Process
McDonald’s calendar 2007.
Draft Capacity & Connection Plan
Strategic Planning Timeline Overview
Next Steps Advisory group debrief call Circulate meeting summary
Release 3 Scope & Proposed Plan
Circle Chart Template Process Name.
The Estonian experience with ex-ante evaluation – set-up and progress
Current state & Prospects of implementation
Gulf of Honduras Task Group 1 Process
PEMPAL Budget Community of Practice (BCOP)
McDonald’s calendar 2007.
Performance Review Process and Responsibilities Group HR
Further Considerations
2015 January February March April May June July August September
Presentation transcript:

Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Status Briefing #2 – Public August 28, 2009

2 Agenda  Trademark Fee Cost Analysis  Objective  Timeframe  Status  Accomplishments  Next Steps  Presentation  Challenges  Questions

3 Trademark Fee Cost Analysis The Trademark Fee Cost Analysis is a joint project between CFO and Trademark Organizations to identify the cost of work performed for Trademark and TTAB Processing Fees. OMB Circular A-25 requires Fee Studies. Makes good business sense.

4 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.  Use cost information for making management decisions including future fee setting.

5 Current Timeframe - Revised  Executive level kick-off – January 2009 (completed)  Formal cost study team kick-off – March 2009 (completed)  Costing model complete – August 2009 (on track)  Fee Cost Analysis complete – September 2009  Other costing requirements – October 2009

6 Project Plan - Status  Completed Phase I and II – Trademark Model Revision  In-process Phase III – Trademark Cost Analysis  Progress made in making up time lost in July due to competing resource requirements  Finalizing displays for reporting final results

7 Accomplishments  Validated Trademark processes and activities through discussions with Trademark process owners  Mapped activities to fee codes  Identified activity drivers to allocate activity costs to fee codes  Developed rules for distributing shared services and secondary costs within the model  Revised Trademark cost model to capture 67 Trademark fees as final cost objects  Discussed and validated shared service allocation methodology and work in process with Pil-bara

8 Next Steps…  Finalize cost model including activities, workloads, fees and corresponding relationships, and validate initial set of results against FY 2008 costs (August)  Validate results (August/September)  Finalize displays of fee costs (September)  Validate unit costs to total costs (September)  Calculate costs with FY 2007 and FY 2009 data (September)  Deliver final presentation to Executives (September)

9 Presentation of Final Results  Develop details for final presentation  Present mock-up displays by end of August  Identify the fully burdened unit cost for all Trademark and TTAB processing fees  Display cost contribution of direct and indirect costs for each processing fee unit cost

10 Challenges  Defining and formalizing the methodology at the onset.  Identifying and developing source data to meet information requirements.  Coordinating schedules of team members and process owners and the necessary follow-on meetings.  Dealing with competing priorities and trying to keep to the project timeline.

11 Questions… Thank you!