Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Intellectual Property Law Blogs -> Just a Patent Examiner

Intellectual Property Law

: Just a Patent Examiner

Q. Todd Speaks!

Q. Todd Dickenson, the once and (perhaps) future Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, participated in a panel discussion titled "A Model Patent Office for the Future -- Promoting and Protecting Investments in Innovation" at the BIO International Convention.

Q. Todd was giving his thoughts on some of the most pressing problems at the PTO, and his view on how they might be best addressed. His comments come across as pretty much the next best thing to a candidate's stump speech.

I must say, I liked what I heard (or at least what the coverage says I would have heard had I been there).

He proposed a number of reforms at the Office, including "changes in Office leadership, the count system, examination time allotments and examiner pay, enhanced worksharing, an end to fee diversion, and deferred examination".

Also prominently mentioned was the fact that "rulemaking transparency and attempts to engage stakeholders in the process would be critical to the success of any future rulemaking". He also addressed the subjects of fee diversion and deferred examination. Music to my ears.

[Not that the proposed rules defining limits to continuations and claims, as wrong-headed as they were, didn't have any benefits; I've been seeing a whole lot of applications with 3 independent/20 total claims lately. A nice break from the number of claims I'd grown used to seeing.]

He also made the points that "the count system, by which the Office measures examiner (and supervisor) performance, was in need of an update", and that "the amount of time allotted for examination, which he said ranged from 18-36 hours per application, was also in need of an update".

These changes would certainly not be cheap to implement, but are well worth some serious consideration.

You can read the details at PatentDocs.

Full post as published by Just a Patent Examiner on May 26, 2009 (boomark / email).