|
Examinerguy
|
 |
« Reply #3150 on: 10-25-09 at 01:28 pm » |
|
I don't see that amending the count system would necessarily increase costs. So much time is being wasted now by frivolous rejections that by amending the count system to pressure examiners to do proper searches and rejections, the examiners might well save time in the long run.
I mean, really, when examiners blows off responses by using crap art, they just wast the entire time spent on those responses. They don't use the next two months to find good art to make proper rejections next time around; they just use the time to blow off even more crap responses on yet more applications.
I had one where the examiner didn't even reject the invention -- he rejected the prior art section! The invention involved a serial connection; the prior art involved various sizes of parallel connections. The whole point was to get rid of the dozens of different parallel designs. So, the examiner went out, found some stuff that used parallel connections, and wrote, "hey, see, people have been using parallel connections in this field for years!"
So, how long did he waste on reading, searching, and doing the writeup? Four hours, maybe? It took me about half an hour to read everything and figure out he'd completely blown it, another half hour to explain it to my manager, and an hour to write a very polite response to the examiner in which I repeatedly had to delete phrases such as "boneheaded cretin", "descendant of slugs", and "I hope you don't breed" that mysteriously kept appearing.
And then on another one, the client screwed up and sent in prior art that matched their invention perfectly. It would've been a trivial slam-dunk rejection, but the examiner never bothered to read the reference, and neither did the client.
Look, I can't speak for the rest of the world, but I personally don't mind a good, solid rejection. Give me one and I'll go tell the client he's screwed. Then you guys can get back to watching night elf strippers in the WoW taverns.
Again, the only way to prevent examiners from sending out crap (which I wouldn't say is the majority of the time, but possibly 20%) is to give them more time. What does that mean? More money. Like I've mentioned in various posts...I don't care if your company spent 10 billion dollars and 10 years researching the patent application I am reviewing. I need to get that case out in a day (2 days at most) or else I get fired (in the long run). If I don't have a full understanding of the claimed invention within a few hours, I'm rejecting it under anything that reads even remotely on the claims...even if it is in another field of endeavor. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
horsechute
|
|
« Reply #3151 on: 10-25-09 at 05:22 pm » |
|
MYK, we may not have always seen I to I on everything, but at least I think it is fair to say that you have a quite respectable intellect (perhaps the most valuable thing here, and your knowledge of econ/law/cs are a nice combination that will no doubt serve you well). I recall a rather nice analysis you once made of the DMC which was quite good - good working grasp of the details (sign of a good lawyer if I may say so), especially for someone who had not yet attended LS. So, you are no doubt doing well in LS, and I appologize for any disagreements we may have had, especially on 03 of 2008. And, if I may humbly say so, I know when I am wrong.
"You could at least explain your reasoning in the nutritional supplement/vitamin metabolite thread."
Done.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10-25-09 at 08:42 pm by horsechute »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
horsechute
|
|
« Reply #3152 on: 10-25-09 at 05:35 pm » |
|
"Again, the only way to prevent examiners from sending out crap (which I wouldn't say is the majority of the time, but possibly 20%) is to give them more time. What does that mean? More money."
Nah, if you mean pay examiners more, they already make enough. If you mean hire more examiners, that is a bit more complicated. In truth, a lot of examiners finish their work early, like the guy who used to go shopping instead of doing his overtime. And some work hard, because their SPE won't let them allow cases. And some hand out crap, and laugh all the way to the bank, although that is getting a little harder lately, with the increased oversight. So now, those lazy bastards are instead becoming SPE's. I know plenty of people who took that route. And now they are laughing even harder on their way to the bank. Now, not only do they get a GS-15 salary, but they have "overtime" layered on top of that. I put overtime in quotation marks, because to do overtime, you first need to do time. Truth is, SPE's don't do any "time" in the first place. At least not that I ever saw.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10-25-09 at 06:23 pm by horsechute »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Examinerguy
|
|
« Reply #3153 on: 10-25-09 at 06:00 pm » |
|
Nah, if you mean pay examiners more, they already make enough. If you mean hire more examiners, that is a bit more complicated. In truth, a lot of examiners finish their work early, like the guy who used to go shopping instead of doing his overtime. And some work hard, because their SPE won't let them allow cases. And some hand out crap, and laugh all the way to the bank, although that is getting a little harder lately, with the increased oversight. So now, those lazy bastards are instead becoming SPE's. I know plenty of people who took that route. And now they are laughing even harder on their way to the bank. Now, not only do they get a GS-15 salary, but they have "overtime" layered on top of that. I put overtime in quotation marks, because to do overtime, you first need to do time. Truth is, SPE's don't do any "time" in the first place. At least not that I ever saw.
Most GS-15s can't really work much OT anyhow b/c the max anyone can make is 153K (GS-15 step 10) under some random law/policy/who knows, |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
horsechute
|
|
« Reply #3154 on: 10-25-09 at 06:32 pm » |
|
True, but I say enough is enough. Why pay them any more when they do next to nothing anyhow? And what are they doing now (or in the near future) that the office has stopped hiring, and there will be nobody to "train", even though we all know that is a joke because the new hires are "trained" before the SPE's even begin working with them.
Everyone I know who became an SPE did so because they were tired of examining cases. I say it is time to make them start contributing to the bottom line and examine a reasonable number of cases themselves. If nothing else, it will keep them in touch with what is going on in the office. As I recall, Commisioner Rogan thought it was a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Examinerguy
|
|
« Reply #3155 on: 10-25-09 at 06:36 pm » |
|
All I know is that if there was no way for me to get out of examining, I would leave the office tomorrow. Examining isn't a life-time job...it is the grunt work that you perform in order to become that typical manager that does nothing but order the underlings around (a SPE).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
horsechute
|
|
« Reply #3156 on: 10-25-09 at 07:19 pm » |
|
All I know is that if there was no way for me to get out of examining, I would leave the office tomorrow.
Did you really mean no?
Anyhow, fair enough.
Out of sheer curiosity which (generically) art do you examine?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10-25-09 at 07:43 pm by horsechute »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Examinerguy
|
|
« Reply #3157 on: 10-25-09 at 08:39 pm » |
|
I mean "no" to mean, if it was impossible for me to get out of examining at the PTO I would leave the PTO tomorrow. Very broadly speaking I am not in the chemical or mechanical arts  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
LivingItUp
|
|
« Reply #3158 on: 10-26-09 at 07:47 am » |
|
All I know is that if there was no way for me to get out of examining, I would leave the office tomorrow. Examining isn't a life-time job...it is the grunt work that you perform in order to become that typical manager that does nothing but order the underlings around (a SPE).
My view of examining ... You are like an assembly line worker. You repetitively perform task X of Y during examination step Z. It is mostly mindless work. Examining is not a job for someone who aspires to "make their mark" on the world. No well honed talent is required. Your "accomplishments" are mostly meaningless. It does not require much analytic thinking. Examining is mostly mindless assembly line process thinking. It is perfect for someone with low ambition in life. It is perfect for someone who doesn't want to use their brain too much. It is perfect for someone who just wants a paycheck, and realizes that a job is the unfortunate way of getting one. I guess that is why I like it so much. 1: I know there are people in the world who aspire to "do great things". We hear about them striving to cure a medical disorder, become entrepreneurs, "save the environment", volunteer to help others. I am definitely not one of them. 2: There are people who want to use their minds. They get advanced education. They go out in the world and use their brain power to earn a living. It is much easier to mindlessly and repetitively examine an application, than it is to have to constantly use one's brain power to maintain employment. 3: I know there are people like me who really just want a paycheck, and don't really care much about engineering, or IP. Maybe we were meant for others things, or we never developed a career interest. Maybe our work habits are somewhere on the slacker spectrum, and we realize that "true employment" would be iffy. Could we hold a "real job"? We accept our lot in life now. We accept that our skillset has taken us as far as we can go. We will probably bitch and moan if someone wants to cut our hours, and shout that we will quit the PTO if the work conditions get any worse, yet confidentially, we know our ship is anchored. Examinerguy, what are your reasons? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10-26-09 at 05:09 pm by LivingItUp »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
horsechute.
Junior Member
Posts: 11
|
|
« Reply #3159 on: 10-26-09 at 09:51 am » |
|
It is a wonder you are still single.
HorseSchute, although ethically challenged and apparently not to bright, is probably not a bad guy in person; he just does not like what I have to say about the PTO, since he obviously works there. After all, who else would take it so personally? But that is the whole point. He would not take it so personally if it were not true. So in a sense, HorseSchute actually does have one redeeming quality after all. He is patriotic.
Now get back to your counts, HorseSchute.
The funny thing is that when I make fun of you, I reference facts which I know are true because you have disclosed them yourself. When you retort, you just grasp at straws and make things up. Tell me, horsechute, why are you still single? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
horsechute
|
|
« Reply #3160 on: 10-26-09 at 07:46 pm » |
|
"When you retort, you just grasp at straws and make things up."
You think that there should be doubt as to your being an unethical half-brain?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 10-26-09 at 07:51 pm by horsechute »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Examinerguy
|
|
« Reply #3161 on: 10-26-09 at 08:36 pm » |
|
My view of examining ...
You are like an assembly line worker. You repetitively perform task X of Y during examination step Z. It is mostly mindless work.
Examining is not a job for someone who aspires to "make their mark" on the world. No well honed talent is required. Your "accomplishments" are mostly meaningless. It does not require much analytic thinking. Examining is mostly mindless assembly line process thinking.
It is perfect for someone with low ambition in life. It is perfect for someone who doesn't want to use their brain too much. It is perfect for someone who just wants a paycheck, and realizes that a job is the unfortunate way of getting one.
I guess that is why I like it so much.
1: I know there are people in the world who aspire to "do great things". We hear about them striving to cure a medical disorder, become entrepreneurs, "save the environment", volunteer to help others. I am definitely not one of them.
2: There are people who want to use their minds. They get advanced education. They go out in the world and use their brain power to earn a living. It is much easier to mindlessly and repetitively examine an application, than it is to have to constantly use one's brain power to maintain employment.
3: I know there are people like me who really just want a paycheck, and don't really care much about engineering, or IP. Maybe we were meant for others things, or we never developed a career interest. Maybe our work habits are somewhere on the slacker spectrum, and we realize that "true employment" would be iffy. Could we hold a "real job"?
We accept our lot in life now. We accept that our skillset has taken us as far as we can go. We will probably bitch and moan if someone wants to cut our hours, and shout that we will quit the PTO if the work conditions get any worse, yet confidentially, we know our ship is anchored.
Examinerguy, what are your reasons?
We must be in totally different Arts. My reasons are that: 1.) Everyday I examine something completely different (my art is extremely broad and crosses virtually every electrical, computer and even sometimes mechanical class). 2.) I have to research and study on almost every case because of 1, making everyday like studying for a college final. 3.) No one in my art knows anything about my case (theoretically) because the class is so broad, everyone just knows their own docket and minor variations thereof. 4.) We get no time to make confident and correct decisions making it almost impossible to take pride in our work. 5.) Every new bi-week is a clean slate, it isn't like busy season in business where you are working crazily for 3 months out of the year and work an easy schedule for the remainder. Every bi-week is a feeling of starting over. There is no end and no time to relax. The work sucks, but I don't think it is any more meaningless as a regular lawyer who has to read and write under a time crunch all day...the difference though is that they get paid twice as much and go to 3 more years of school. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
horeschute
Newbie
Posts: 4
|
|
« Reply #3162 on: 10-27-09 at 01:17 pm » |
|
You think that there should be doubt as to your being an unethical half-brain?
You think that there should be doubt as to your being... What a poorly constructed sentence. I can only imagine how bad it was before your neurotic editing. What firm do you work for again? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DogDayPM 9er9er9er
|
|
« Reply #3163 on: 10-28-09 at 01:15 pm » |
|
You think that there should be doubt as to your being an unethical half-brain?
You think that there should be doubt as to your being... What a poorly constructed sentence. I can only imagine how bad it was before your neurotic editing. What firm do you work for again? OK, that one actually DID throw me for several seconds; thought you were arguing with yourself until I finally did a manual over-ride on the brain's desire to overlook that transposition! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Any and all disclaimers you may see on this forum used by members more experienced and/or smarter than I, are hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
|
|
|
|
MYK
|
|
« Reply #3164 on: 10-28-09 at 02:08 pm » |
|
You think that there should be doubt as to your being an unethical half-brain?
You think that there should be doubt as to your being... What a poorly constructed sentence. I can only imagine how bad it was before your neurotic editing. What firm do you work for again? OK, that one actually DID throw me for several seconds; thought you were arguing with yourself until I finally did a manual over-ride on the brain's desire to overlook that transposition! Lanham. Learn it. Love it. Live it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Disclaimer: not only am I not a lawyer, I'm not your lawyer. Therefore, this does not constitute legal advice.
|
|
|
|
