Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[klaviernista]

Department of Justice Announces New Assistant United States Attorneys and FBI Agents to Combat Intellectual Property Crimes:

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/April/10-dag-480.html

Not sure whether these are "new" positions, in that new people will be hired, or whether these "new" positions will be filled by bodies already within the FBI and DOJ.  Interesting nonetheless.

[xmnr]

Enforcing the will and tyranny of the RIAA/MPAA?  No thanks.

[newattorney]

Working for the FBI as an agent is not like being an attorney.

[klaviernista]

Working for the FBI as an agent is not like being an attorney.

Agreed.  But it is an "alternative" career.  And since my op relates to FBI positions enforcing IP, it is an alternative "IP" career.  Just trying to help some folks having a hard time finding work to think outside the box. 

[klaviernista]

The pay sucks, no?

Patent examiners make more $$$$ than FBI agents.

I wouldn't say it sucks.  My wife is a special agent (not for the FBI), and she made over $100k after only three years.  While $100k is not what it used to be, it definitely doesn't "suck." 

Also, I'm not sure whether the pay scale you quoted for the FBI includes law enforcement availability pay (LEAP).  Most federal law enforcement officers are required to work LEAP, which is an extra 2 hours per day, and they get a corresponding 25% bump up in pay as a result.  Also, I doubt the other benefits of many special agent poisitions are advertised.  E.g., the fact that agents are required to work out at least 3 hours per week, and that those 3 hours count against the agent's worked time for the week.  Then there are the monthly trips to the firing range (i.e., getting paid to shoot guns 1 day a month), the monthly defensive tactics trainings (i.e., getting paid to wrestle and learn martial arts for 1 day a month), etc.

Its definitely an exciting job.  Had I known that those types of jobs existed outside the FBI prior to investing so much time into becoming a patent attorney, I probably would have joined the special agent ranks myself.

[klaviernista]

But once an examiner is hoteling, I cannot see how the FBI job can compete.

The badge and gun, prestige, legal powers might appeal to some, but I don't know, guess I am lazy, because I would take the extra money, and comfortable work anyday.

Dollar for dollar, a hotelling examiner could probably have more "play" money than an FBI agent.  It would depend on the duty location and grade of the agent vs. the hotelling location and grade of the examiner.  Also, I wouldn;t say that a GS-13+ examiner has an easier job that the FBI agent.  The boredom can be extremely intense.  Not to mention the quota requirements can be very high at that level.

[LivingItUp]

I wouldn't say it sucks.  My wife is a special agent (not for the FBI), and she made over $100k after only three years.  While $100k is not what it used to be, it definitely doesn't "suck." 

Well, "suck" I meant to put in the context of doing what they do. The front line law enforcement have a rough job. I don't know if your wife is front line law enforcement, but making GS pay for that kind of work seems "sucky".

Your wife is working 50 hours every work week (according to the extra 2 hours per day)? and still only making 100k? I mean, that extra 25% gets her to 100k?

And this is in DC? With a high cost of living?

[klaviernista]

Well, "suck" I meant to put in the context of doing what they do. The front line law enforcement have a rough job. I don't know if your wife is front line law enforcement, but making GS pay for that kind of work seems "sucky".

Your wife is working 50 hours every work week (according to the extra 2 hours per day)? and still only making 100k? I mean, that extra 25% gets her to 100k?

And this is in DC? With a high cost of living?

My wife made 100k after three years.  She's been there 10.  So no, she is not still "only" making 100k.  And no, we are not in DC.  There are field offices all over the U.S. for FBI and most other government agencies.

Also, my wife isn't in front line law enforcement, ala a police officer, secret service, or FBI special task force.  She investigates white collar crimes (primarily fraud) for one of the IG offices.  The clsoest she gets to front line is when she has to conduct a search warrant, and then she is with a minimum of 10 other agents.

[klaviernista]

All the primary examiners I know can knock out their cases fast. I have seen a primary examiner do entire biweek of work in one day. A few are very ethical and purposely put in long hours, but most "play the examining game" (work as fast as possible --> take overtime for time not worked).

I am near the 160k mark myself, and I manage to fit in tons of time off. I think a good primary should be hitting the 160-170k pay, and be working in a few extra months off per year.

Glad to hear you are enjoying the PTO and are successful there.  Not sure I would evaluate whether a primary is "good" or not with how much money they make and and how much time they take off, but to each their own.  I'd be more concerned with work quality.  That's one problem I have with the PTO.  Once an examiner becomes a primary, there seems to be relatively little oversight given to their day to day work product.  The reuslt being that you have a lot of little chiefs with a lot of power, and a high probability that there will be relatively non-uniform application of that power by said chiefs.

[DogDayPM 9er9er9er]

...most [examiners] "play the examining game" (work as fast as possible --> take overtime for time not worked).

??

[dablueman]

...most [examiners] "play the examining game" (work as fast as possible --> take overtime for time not worked).

??

It's an unethical/illegal practice of saying you worked overtime when you didn't because you pushed out a lot of actions that biweek (likely not high quality) and therefore your production is high enough to claim overtime and still meet your production goals.

Maybe it's just me, but when people say they do this I find it highly suspicious because for me to do that I'd have to be putting out low quality actions. It tells me they're skipping important parts of the examining process. For example, reading the spec, really checking IDSs, doing an NPL search, not actually responding to arguments, etc.

[bald & chained]

...most [examiners] "play the examining game" (work as fast as possible --> take overtime for time not worked).

??

It's an unethical/illegal practice of saying you worked overtime when you didn't because you pushed out a lot of actions that biweek (likely not high quality) and therefore your production is high enough to claim overtime and still meet your production goals.

Maybe it's just me, but when people say they do this I find it highly suspicious because for me to do that I'd have to be putting out low quality actions. It tells me they're skipping important parts of the examining process. For example, reading the spec, really checking IDSs, doing an NPL search, not actually responding to arguments, etc.

Add reading the claims to the list of skipped parts.  A lot of primaries produce some of the s**tiest work product ever.  Bogus restrictions splitting essentially identical apparatus and method claims, blank rejections of dependent claims, or, on the flip-side, blank first-action allowances (especially on continuations). The whole examination process is like playing lottery - 33% of the time you get real unlucky and draw an assistant examiner who's being closely watched by his primary/SPE and then you are getting NOTHING through, 33% of the time you actually get reasonable prosecution, and 33% of the time you get lucky and draw a primary before the end of quarter, in which case the most amazing things get allowed.  It's litigator's wet dream to enforce a patent in EDTX that is super-broad, has no prosecution history, and cites 2K references on its face (all "diligently" considered by the examiner, of course) and has 5 pending continuations.

[DogDayPM 9er9er9er]

...It's an unethical/illegal practice of saying you worked overtime when you didn't because you pushed out a lot of actions ...

dablueman, thanks.  That's what I thought he meant, but then thought ... he couldn't mean that...

[Robert K S]

It tells me they're skipping important parts of the examining process. For example, reading the spec, really checking IDSs, doing an NPL search, not actually responding to arguments, etc.

I don't get many examiners that strike me as doing all of these things, but if you do, then thank you.

[dablueman]

An examiner can report working 80 hours in a 2 week pay period, and accomplish nothing (0 counts), and then make up the loss of work in a future pay period. It is not considered unethical/illegal to do this. It is not considered unethical/illegal to report working and not actually produce anything. The same is true of overtime (i.e., just because you reported working does not mean you actually produced anything).

If you actually believe this tell your SPE that you're doing it. The fact is that receiving pay per hour of time when you did not in fact work that amount of time is theft. I see your argument as a very warped sense of ethics, or more accurately a complete lack thereof. You're not being paid per count, with overtime you're being paid per hour you spend at work over the 80/biweek required. The count system has nothing to do with overtime.