Working for the USPTO

Started by JTripodo, 01-31-05 at 10:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

newbie1111

Quote from: steelie on 01-23-19 at 12:46 AM
Quote from: newbie1111 on 01-23-19 at 12:38 AM
so, to summarize.

THE BAD:
-RCE are now going to be all 1.0 with no bonus (4th or 5th in qtr). However, we get rid of .75 RCE.
-Count Saturday (11:59EST)

THE GOOD:
-BD gets rounded up to nearest .5 or .0 (19.1 goes to 19.5 and 31.6 goes to 32)
-Add 3.5 BD to everything? (31.6->32->35.5)?
Add 3.5 and remove the 2.5 RCE adjustment so just +1 hours/bd

so 31.6->33 and i lose the RCE bonus? are we actually ahead here? my gs12 is 31.6 and am a gs14. i think i'd rather keep my bonus. oh well.

bluerogue

#7591
Quote from: newbie1111 on 11-27-74 at 09:41 PM
so 31.6->33 and i lose the RCE bonus? are we actually ahead here? my gs12 is 31.6 and am a gs14. i think i'd rather keep my bonus. oh well.

Just barely either way. I did the calculation.  It's not entirely clear how it will work though after re-reading the thing.  The document seems to indicate one of the below is correct, but does not make clear which one.

Could be 1) (BD + 3.5)/position factor or 2) (BD/position factor) + 3.5.   Under 1), we're ahead by 20 minutes. under 2), we're ahead by 1.1 hours.  Either way, it's sorta underwhelming.
The views expressed are my own and do not represent those of the USPTO. I am also not your lawyer nor providing legal advice.

steelie

Quote from: newbie1111 on 01-23-19 at 12:51 AM
Quote from: steelie on 01-23-19 at 12:46 AM
Quote from: newbie1111 on 01-23-19 at 12:38 AM
so, to summarize.

THE BAD:
-RCE are now going to be all 1.0 with no bonus (4th or 5th in qtr). However, we get rid of .75 RCE.
-Count Saturday (11:59EST)

THE GOOD:
-BD gets rounded up to nearest .5 or .0 (19.1 goes to 19.5 and 31.6 goes to 32)
-Add 3.5 BD to everything? (31.6->32->35.5)?
Add 3.5 and remove the 2.5 RCE adjustment so just +1 hours/bd

so 31.6->33 and i lose the RCE bonus? are we actually ahead here? my gs12 is 31.6 and am a gs14. i think i'd rather keep my bonus. oh well.
Checking my estats, no OT, no bonuses, @95%, I do 30-40 RCES per year.

So, I do about 22-34 1.25 count RCES per year.

So, I will lose 5.5-8.5 counts minus the gain of 1.5-2 counts (for .75 to 1 count), so a potential net loss of about 4-6.5 counts/yr  :'(.

That is like a biweek of work for me.

So, it appears like even in the worst case, I come out slightly ahead.

Nothing to get excited about though.  :'(

fewyearsin

Did they have AU/CPC BDs broken out or listed anywhere?  I'm impatient now!
This comment does not represent the opinion or position of the PTO or any law firm; is not legal advice; and represents only a few quick thoughts. I'm willing to learn, let me know if you think I'm wrong. Seek out the advice of a competent patent attorney for answers to specific questions.

steelie

What seems confusing to me is tieing the hours/bd to a CPC class and not to an art.

My AU is about 90% in G06F "ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING", however, 10% of the time it is in a related CPC class.

For example, an application directed at CPC class H04N "Television" may have a G06F "Electrical digital data processing" feature.

If I happen to do a H04N application, then do I get my primary CPC class hours/bd, or this particular application's CPC hours/bd?

two banks of four

i didn't initially realize that the additional 3.5 hours is in reality just 1 hour (since it's on top of the 2.5 hrs currently in place).  in which case, i'd much rather keep the old system

i work in an area where the invention may be classified into almost any of the main CPC sections (viz. A, B, C, D, E, G, and H), though one of these predominates.  I wonder how that's going to be factored in.  What if the subcombination is in one CPC section (say C) while the article comprising the subcombination is in another, which takes precedence? 

it's all a bit of unintended consequences and such...


steelie

Quote from: two banks of four on 01-23-19 at 10:15 PM
i didn't initially realize that the additional 3.5 hours is in reality just 1 hour (since it's on top of the 2.5 hrs currently in place).  in which case, i'd much rather keep the old system

i work in an area where the invention may be classified into almost any of the main CPC sections (viz. A, B, C, D, E, G, and H), though one of these predominates.  I wonder how that's going to be factored in.  What if the subcombination is in one CPC section (say C) while the article comprising the subcombination is in another, which takes precedence? 

it's all a bit of unintended consequences and such...
At net +1 hours/bd I appear to be worse off, because of the RCE count loss.

At net +1.3 hours/bd I appear to be about break even.

So, it appears like I have to get lucky on the CPC class averaging and the GS-12 rounding, just to break even.

fewyearsin

Quote from: steelie on 01-24-19 at 07:48 AM
Quote from: two banks of four on 01-23-19 at 10:15 PM
i didn't initially realize that the additional 3.5 hours is in reality just 1 hour (since it's on top of the 2.5 hrs currently in place).  in which case, i'd much rather keep the old system

i work in an area where the invention may be classified into almost any of the main CPC sections (viz. A, B, C, D, E, G, and H), though one of these predominates.  I wonder how that's going to be factored in.  What if the subcombination is in one CPC section (say C) while the article comprising the subcombination is in another, which takes precedence? 

it's all a bit of unintended consequences and such...
At net +1 hours/bd I appear to be worse off, because of the RCE count loss.

At net +1.3 hours/bd I appear to be about break even.

So, it appears like I have to get lucky on the CPC class averaging and the GS-12 rounding, just to break even.
All of that, just to break even.  And then there's the loss of autocount.  And the seemingly much-easier-to-give-out errors.  And the likelihood of getting pigeonholed into whatever art you happen to be working on when they start assigning new cases based on your old cases.  A whole lot of complication and confusion for a possible measly potential increase in hours/bd.  Not sure I'm liking how this is shaking out, but we'll just have to see (since I have no power or influence).
This comment does not represent the opinion or position of the PTO or any law firm; is not legal advice; and represents only a few quick thoughts. I'm willing to learn, let me know if you think I'm wrong. Seek out the advice of a competent patent attorney for answers to specific questions.

johnthatcher

Hello,

Does anyone know if it is possible to sue the USPTO in your first year (when you are probationary) for unfair treatment ?
Thanks.

fewyearsin

Quote from: johnthatcher on 01-25-19 at 08:07 PM
Hello,

Does anyone know if it is possible to sue the USPTO in your first year (when you are probationary) for unfair treatment ?
Thanks.
You're asking the wrong question.  I think that your question is more about whether you have reasonable grounds and what your chances of success are and what remedies might be available.  Those are questions more suited to an attorney that specializes in employment law, not patent law.  Most of us here are patent lawyers/agents/examiners. 

If you have a grievance, POPA (the patent examiner's union) would be a good place to start (and you might be required to start there, I don't know the rules).  Be aware that these things can be very time-sensitive as to your rights, so if you genuinely feel that you have been discriminated against or treated unlawfully unfairly, you should act sooner rather than later.  Being in your probationary period does reduce some of your rights, but does not eliminate them.
This comment does not represent the opinion or position of the PTO or any law firm; is not legal advice; and represents only a few quick thoughts. I'm willing to learn, let me know if you think I'm wrong. Seek out the advice of a competent patent attorney for answers to specific questions.

Holden308



Is anyone else thinking that POPA gave away the whole farm for almost nothing in return??

Think about how much management is getting - how much easier operations will be with CPC routing, and being able to route cases to examiner from multiple (possibly even a dozen or more) classification areas?

And in exchange we are getting roughly 1.5 hrs per case?  That's roughly 6.5% more time for me.  Whoopdee-freaking-doo. 

I was thinking more in the ballpark of 30% more time.  I guarantee you the complexity of applications has increased at least 30% since the last time the production system was reevaluated.  If you look at the average # of claims, the average # of documents on the IDS, and the average # of words per claim set, I guarantee you applications are WAY more complex than they were even in the mid 90s.  Not to mention the # of documents we are expected to look at for a thorough search. 

And, as someone else pointed out, changing all RCEs to 1 count may actually be a net loss to Examiners.  So I may be breaking even on examining time, in exchange for huge concessions that make things exponentially easier on management.

two banks of four

Quote from: fewyearsin on 01-25-19 at 08:27 PM
Quote from: johnthatcher on 01-25-19 at 08:07 PM
Hello,

Does anyone know if it is possible to sue the USPTO in your first year (when you are probationary) for unfair treatment ?
Thanks.
You're asking the wrong question.  I think that your question is more about whether you have reasonable grounds and what your chances of success are and what remedies might be available.  Those are questions more suited to an attorney that specializes in employment law, not patent law.  Most of us here are patent lawyers/agents/examiners. 

If you have a grievance, POPA (the patent examiner's union) would be a good place to start (and you might be required to start there, I don't know the rules).  Be aware that these things can be very time-sensitive as to your rights, so if you genuinely feel that you have been discriminated against or treated unlawfully unfairly, you should act sooner rather than later.  Being in your probationary period does reduce some of your rights, but does not eliminate them.

pretty much this.  i'll add that some POPA reps are incompetent and knows nothing about the rights of someone on probation.  I was told by a popa rep that getting a letter from the Tech Center director was a sure sign that i was going to get canned 3 months down the road (the letter was actually written to imply that if my production doesn't go up, i'd be canned).  In her mind, such a letter for the director meant only one thing, despite the fact that many who haven't averaged 95% production for quite a while by that point receive just such a letter.

Someone versed in labor laws concerning feds (that is to say, Title 5 of the U.S.C.) may be what you need to find.  Luckily, there are quite a few firms in the area.

Quote from: Holden308 on 01-25-19 at 10:43 PM


Is anyone else thinking that POPA gave away the whole farm for almost nothing in return??

Think about how much management is getting - how much easier operations will be with CPC routing, and being able to route cases to examiner from multiple (possibly even a dozen or more) classification areas?

And in exchange we are getting roughly 1.5 hrs per case?  That's roughly 6.5% more time for me.  Whoopdee-freaking-doo. 

I was thinking more in the ballpark of 30% more time.  I guarantee you the complexity of applications has increased at least 30% since the last time the production system was reevaluated.  If you look at the average # of claims, the average # of documents on the IDS, and the average # of words per claim set, I guarantee you applications are WAY more complex than they were even in the mid 90s.  Not to mention the # of documents we are expected to look at for a thorough search. 

And, as someone else pointed out, changing all RCEs to 1 count may actually be a net loss to Examiners.  So I may be breaking even on examining time, in exchange for huge concessions that make things exponentially easier on management.

I am not privy to the details of the negotiation, but one gets the feeling that it's not a truly fair negotiation.  Management can implement an objective, POPA has only the power to negotiate how it's implemented, not whether it should be

certainly agreed that things have gotten a lot more complicated.  Ironically, it's with the introduction of CPC that it becomes apparent that the documents are so horribly classified, that searching either just USPC or just CPC isn't sufficient.  So now, it's searching two different locations for art.

this is particularly problematic for the higher ups who still have the misguided concept that only flip search is a real search

johnthatcher

Quote from: fewyearsin on 01-25-19 at 08:27 PM
Quote from: johnthatcher on 01-25-19 at 08:07 PM
Hello,

Does anyone know if it is possible to sue the USPTO in your first year (when you are probationary) for unfair treatment ?
Thanks.
You're asking the wrong question.  I think that your question is more about whether you have reasonable grounds and what your chances of success are and what remedies might be available.  Those are questions more suited to an attorney that specializes in employment law, not patent law.  Most of us here are patent lawyers/agents/examiners. 

If you have a grievance, POPA (the patent examiner's union) would be a good place to start (and you might be required to start there, I don't know the rules).  Be aware that these things can be very time-sensitive as to your rights, so if you genuinely feel that you have been discriminated against or treated unlawfully unfairly, you should act sooner rather than later.  Being in your probationary period does reduce some of your rights, but does not eliminate them.

Thanks for the response. 

I am a Patent examiner and have been with the USPTO for about 6 months.  My primary is a bit old school and appears to make things very difficult for me. The SPE does not seem to want to help much. Even the trainers at the academy found my primary's ways a little shocking.  The end result of all this is low production on my part which can obviously affect the retention. 

steelie

Quote from: Holden308 on 01-25-19 at 10:43 PM
And in exchange we are getting roughly 1.5 hrs per case?  That's roughly 6.5% more time for me. 
You only get +1.5 hours, if you get the full +.5 GS-12 rounding.

You may not get that. 

If your CPC hours are 24.4, then you get +.1 rounding up.

So, the net would be +1.1 hours/bd.

Also, it's max +1.5 hours/bd, not per application. So, you can only get 1/2 * (1.5 max) additional hours per application.

However, if you don't do many RCES, then I think it's great.

If you do high production bonuses and overtime, fueled by RCEs, then I think you will be a net loser because of the RCE loss on 1.25 cases. These examiners likely always had "1 count" RCEs available and never (rarely) took did a .75 RCE to meet the quota. So, this new PAP is pure RCE loss.

ex-aminer?

Quote from: johnthatcher on 01-25-19 at 08:07 PM
Hello,

Does anyone know if it is possible to sue the USPTO in your first year (when you are probationary) for unfair treatment ?
Thanks.

Your follow-up to this states that the primary and SPE in your AU "aren't very helpful".  If that's all there is to it, you don't have a leg to stand on, let alone "suing".

Sink or swim isn't unfair treatment, it's standard USPTO treatment. 

Primaries are doing the same job, but have 2x-3x as many cases to do.  I've always been willing to help with general questions about searching, questions about 35 USC 102/103/112, and case law.  All a primary is really expected to do (if they're not signing your cases) is to provide a class/subclass search. Any "schooling" will be in returned actions.

If you're asking things like, "is this art good?", "should I use this art as a secondary reference?", "what do I do next?", etc. these are questions that primary's/SPEs don't have time for.  We can't understand the invention, read through the claims, then assess the prior art.  The person signing your case will have to consider all these things, once you've done your best and submit it.

IMO you should really be trying to learn and improve your production, instead of blaming others. 

If something messed up is actually happening, then take it to POPA, and disregard this post 😛




www.intelproplaw.com

Terms of Use
Feel free to contact us:
Sorry, spam is killing us.

iKnight Technologies Inc.

www.intelproplaw.com