Comments on: Patent Office Receives Hate Mail Over Proposed Patent Changes

By: David Boundy

David Boundy — Mon, 12 May 2008 16:49:31 +0000

There’s are a couple points of my letter that are far more important than the one excerpted here.

Most crucial, the pattern is now long enough and consistent enough (over 20 instances over nearly two years) to support a conclusion that the PTO has engaged in deliberate misrepresentation to the Office of Management and Budget and the Small Business Administration, by putting forth flawed analyses (using analytical methods that the PTO itself disowned when used by those challenging the rules in the Tafas v Dudas litigation), mischecking boxes, and so forth, all in an apparent attempt to avoid scrutiny or oversight by those parts of the Executive Branch that have the responsibility to make sure that rogue agencies do not impose unwarranted costs on the public.

See sections III IV and V of the letter.

By: phrase search

phrase search — Sat, 03 May 2008 23:04:04 +0000

[...] proposed revision to the rules of practice pertaining to any claim using alternative language to chttp://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2008/04/30/patent-office-receives-hate-mail-over-proposed-pat…Time to Hit The Brakes On That Cliche Washington PostWord to the wise, all you politicos: Beware of [...]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 01 May 2008 12:59:56 +0000

Seems like Europe, and Japan, and basically every other Patent Office that does substantive examination seems able to handle this under a unity of invention standard. Why is it that the USPTO is so far behind these others in ability? If they do not have the infrastructure or the intellectual ability to handle what these other Patent Offices have no problem with, then perhaps that it is the problem that needs to be solved. We shouldn’t be asked to dumb down the application process to their (apparent) level.