The following letter has been sent to many patent attorneys and patent agents asking them to consider joining the USPTO examiner corps.
* * * * *
February 5, 2010
Dear ______
Deputy Under Secretary Sharon Barner and I wanted to contact you directly to let you know about an exciting opportunity for a career as a USPTO patent examiner. The USPTO has recently announced a targeted hiring initiative for experienced IP professionals. We ask that you consider applying for these openings at the USPTO to become a patent examiner.
A career as a patent examiner is both challenging and rewarding. As you consider this opportunity, you should know that USPTO management has undertaken a myriad of initiatives to make the USPTO an outstanding professional work environment. In addition, our modern campus in Alexandria, Virginia, has world-class facilities, including a gym, child-care center, excellent dining and recreational activities nearby. We also have extensive Hoteling programs, where qualified examiners may telework from home.
If you are interested in being considered as a patent examiner, we encourage you to apply to the open USPTO vacancy announcement at http://tiny.cc/ls8j7. Or if you know someone who is interested, please let them know about our open opportunities. If you have questions, please call (800) 786-9757, or send an e-mail to Recruitment@uspto.gov. We hope that you will give serious consideration to applying for our open vacancies. There has never been a more important or promising time to work at the USPTO.
Sincerely,
David J. Kappos
* * * * *
[File Attachment: KapposRecruitingLetter.pdf (33 KB)]
Note: The text above is created by my OCR software which created some errors.
What are the odds of attracting stealth applicants whose sole purpose is to hit their quotas and avoid termination long enough to get some serious dirt of the PTO, then file a qui tam action? Any ideas where to look for dirt or is the PTO sterile?
Think twice before accepting a position as a patent examiner. PTO management has a habit of burning out its examiners and not listening to what they say they need to do the job. There’s a reason it’s so easy to become an examiner compared to nearly any other job in the federal government.
Maybe the addition of numerous new hires will help reduce some of the embarrassing snafus that have issued recently from the USPTO. Anything that helps make patent litigation easier is all right, in my book…
Well despite what people may say about working with the PTO, I really want this job… I was one of the ones who got a letter (got my patent registration number back in September, live in Pittsburgh). I’ve been dying for any patent related job, and nothing has been going my way, likely because my undergrad degree was in biology. Should I just call/email any random SPE and ask for a job? Perhaps somebody out there knows a friendly SPE I should try to contact?
Whatever happened to the notion of regional examination centers? It will be a hard sell to get an IP attorney to relocate (no relocation expenses paid) to the east coast, take a pay cut, and raise the cost of living and commute time. Yes, please sign me up!
“Well, what do you need?”
Hot women.
Well, what do you need?
“My hunch is that they need EE’s.”
You’re wrong. We don’t.
“[F]or the experienced attorney with a reg. number, wouldn’t a mid-career stint as a patent examiner be career suicide?”
Yes, it would be career suicide. Don’t bother applying.
Hmmm…. I can make 170k as an Agent or 70k as an examiner… this IS a tuff choice…..
Outsource these positions – already in the works – see Kappos notes on prosecution efficiency
Outsource prosecution – likewise already done to the point possible – those BIS regulations make it impossible to outsource initial application drafting, since no export license is possible until after the non-provisional application submission.
Club RP! That place was in my neighborhood (at the time). My buddy used to drag me there to party with the embassy staff people who made up 90% of the patrons. I believe I was an examiner in those days.
Why don’t they just outsource these positions to India like other US corporations ?
And then companies could outsource their patent prosecution services to India. That way, counsel would be best placed to attend in-person interviews and oral hearings on appeal.
Why don’t they just outsource these positions to India like other US corporations ? Then, you can speak with “Brad” or “Mary” the Examiner in Bangalore, as you do now when you call a Customer Support service.
The interesting thing about the state of communication in America is that there may be only a small number of letters actually sent out to practitioners from the PTO. You only need 1. 1 guy sends it to Dennis Crouch. Dennis Crouch sends it to 19,000 people the next morning.
Everybody who is in this business and young enough to use a computer is now magically informed.
Ha
CCR… what’s so special about that place ?
I highly recommend Royal Palace at Connecticut & Florida ave.
I went there right after comical (and expensive for me) PTO interview and had great pleasure watching some hot brazilian chick’s fully nude dancing and buying her a couple of drinks afterwords…
What a hell… I dropped more than 20K on apparantly worthless patent, why not drop another hundred and actually enjoy it ?
Ha, at CCR, you pay the strippers to put their clothes back on
Examiners must really need a break from looking at preferred embodiments.
“On the contrary, I’ll probably put it up when I make it in a law firm :)”
Unless your attitude in real life is 100% different than it is on here, you have less than a snowball’s chance in he11 of even getting hired in a law firm. What’s funny is that you don’t get it.
I believe CCR uses pasties, so no bottoms off. However, the older, overweight part was right.
do you know how many openings PTO currently have? out of the number, how many have they filled?
“some hot young snatch is being thrust enthusiactically in his face”
Ha, at CCR, you pay the strippers to put their clothes back on
I was just told by a coworker that the PTO is having some sort of informational webinar for interested parties next Friday.
“To think of having to share a table with my unattractive, overweight, middle-aged boss and watch him drool as some hot young snatch is being thrust enthusiactically in his face…”
You’ve never been to CCR, have you?
“Way back in the day when I was a cub examiner, my SPE would express thanks to his (all male) art unit after an especially productive quarter by taking us to CCR after work for a round of beers. And none of us thought the practice at at all odd or “improper.””
To think of having to share a table with my unattractive, overweight, middle-aged boss and watch him drool as some hot young snatch is being thrust enthusiactically in his face is, quite frankly, nauseating.
PTO is hurting, and that is good.
Yes! Great news for … whom, exactly?
PTO is hurting, and that is good.
I just received the *former examiner* version of this letter (got the agent one last week) – so two (2!) versions of the “please come for work the PTO” letter are out there…
Even my tears have tears.
QQ
qq
6,
I am not RealWorldAttorney.
Attorneys are hurt if the PTO doesn’t want their patent apps, and they’re hurt that the PTO doesn’t want them. Imma lol.
“I expect 6 will be putting up his own brass plaque soon when he realizes that he won’t make it in a law firm. ”
On the contrary, I’ll probably put it up when I make it in a law firm 🙂
Nice new name btw NAL.
I’m hurt that I did not receive one of these letters. QQ
“An old examiner I knew had a brass plaque with his name on it by the stage of the CCR.”
Now THAT is the kind of “famoosity” I would not want. I expect 6 will be putting up his own brass plaque soon when he realizes that he won’t make it in a law firm.
As for the CCR being “no longer next to” the PTO, I think there are still some art units in Crystal Park. Am I wrong?
6 wrote:
“…but we have an entire library about subjects such as that here at the office that examiners can peruse at their leisure”
Kiddo,
you can peruse Playboy or Penthouse at your “leisure”, but not some current textbook on communications theory or statistical framework for automatic speech recognition
I suggest that you run for higher post and leave PTO alone
How do you know that I didn’t?
I’ll take that as an admission that you didn’t.
“(notice that you did not get a letter from Kappos)”
How do you know that I didn’t?
Something just occured to me. All this guessing of peoples’ positions leads me to believe that the one doing the guessing is the one that is doubtful about their own position. You won’t find the answer in anybody else. Look within, then you will know. Funny enough this comes up on this thread, maybe these letters have got people questioning themselves – evidenced by the very first comment on the thread? I’m guessing some firms would benefit by practicing a little more respect.
“My keen ear seems to have a problem hearing about how you are new here, but not an examiner.”
Yes. Because the PTO is the only entity in the DC area authorized to visit CCR.
Applicants have to reject their own claims? News to me.
“Applicants are already required to do most of the Examiner’s job, especially the rejection part.”
…and if the illegal Claims Continuations Rules hadn’t been defeated, applicants would have had to do the Examiner’s job AND pay for doing that job.
“…and I would have succeeded if it weren’t for those meddlesome kids and their dog.”
If I get a job as an Examiner can I examine the application I filed three years ago and which still hasn’t had a FOAM?
Applicants are already required to do most of the Examiner’s job, especially the rejection part.
This way I would get paid for it.
Way back in the day when I was a cub examiner, my SPE would express thanks to his (all male) art unit after an especially productive quarter by taking us to CCR after work for a round of beers. And none of us thought the practice at at all odd or “improper.” This SPE was very popular with his examiners, and was highly regarded by all who knew him as a stand-up guy. His art unit was a model of productivity and examination quality.
He stopped doing this when the first female examiners joined the art unit (he wisely switched to treating us to lunch in Chinatown).
JD is like the jilted ex of the PTO who just can’t stand the thought of the PTO being happier without him. Sorry, JD, the PTO has moved on. (notice that you did not get a letter from Kappos)
Jules,
Didn’t too long ago you assert that you were not an examiner? My keen ear seems to have a problem hearing about how you are new here, but not an examiner.
What’s up with that?
“Just JD showing his age :)”
Pretty funny. Especially coming from a lifer stooge who’s even older.
An old examiner I knew had a brass plaque with his name on it by the stage of the CCR.
Crystal City Restaurant actually being some sort of strip club, although I’m guessing it serves food as well.
Crystal City Resturant. I’m new around here and even I know that 😉 All it takes is a keen ear.
“Creedence Clearwater Revival”
Wrong CCR.
“I wonder how many people on here know what that is?”
Creedence Clearwater Revival
I have read quite a bit o the lit in the library thanks.
“whateverbitches”
No, I don’t. The bio/chem areas are probably the exception to what I said. For most, if not all, of the electrical & mechanical areas, it is usually a negative and not a positive in determining what is or is not “known” or obvious.
MVS
Just JD showing his age 🙂
The Patent Office is no longer next to CCR, but funny anyway.
I wonder how many people on here know what that is?
MVS said: “The LAST thing you guys should want are PHDs . . .”
I take it you don’t work in TC1600.
“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_value_decomposition
No mysticism requiring a PhD. Most EE’s non-grads have extensive mathematics background, some with a double EE-mathematics BS. More than enough to understand these things well enough for examination purposes. ”
Also ‘well enough for examination purposes’ may not actually even require understanding anything. I worked on one case where applicant claimed calculating a pseudoinverse using a variety techniques one of which was SVD. I rejected a dependent claim with a passage of a reference that just talked about using SVD to calculate a pseudoinverse.
fatalist = MM LOL
fatalist this might come as a suprise to you but we have an entire library about subjects such as that here at the office that examiners can peruse at their leisure.
That sounds like a far more pragmatic approach than fatalist’s plan to only hire examiners who each have PhDs in everything and 20 years of experience.
“…that examiners can peruse at their leisure”
Yeah, why don’t you try it sometime 6, instead of spending all of your time on PatentlyO or at CCR.
fatalist this might come as a suprise to you but we have an entire library about subjects such as that here at the office that examiners can peruse at their leisure.
Do you know what those acronyms like FFT or HHT or SVD really mean ?
Not really, Your Honor…
But I did a lot of wikipedia reading while staying at Holiday Inn Express last night
Get real, guys
It’s a start fatal guy. You assume a PhD has knowledge of everything that can come his/her way? You get real dude.
yeah right
have them all read wikipedia before examining patent apps
great idea !!!
Uh-oh, the Hilbert-Huang article uses the word “algorithm.” Doesn’t that mean that any claim that uses the term is therefore unpatentable, per se?
link to en.wikipedia.org
No mysticism requiring a PhD. Most EE’s non-grads have extensive mathematics background, some with a double EE-mathematics BS. More than enough to understand these things well enough for examination purposes.
link to en.wikipedia.org
“More importantly, if a patent application requires a PhD to understand it, then it was poorly written. Of course, you probably think that most jurors (and judges) have PhDs as well, right?”
Yeah, right…
don’t be ridiculous
a “singular value decomposition” or “hilbert-huang transform” should be real easy to understand for judges and jurors in EDT
the reality is this: most judges and jurors in this country don’t understand a single paragraph in some of those patent apps and there is nothign that can be done short of selecting jurors from the pool of available PhDs in math or physics-related fields
it comes down to expert testimonies at the end.
courts can appoint their special masters too, usually some PhD from university faculty who is active in the field
I agree Tazistanjen. It is a lot better than what we had. About the same thing I’d say about Obama vs. Bush. Seems like we have an honest person trying to make things better.
I am really impressed with Kappos. I think it is a great idea to hire some patent attorneys as Examiners. I like him gathering ideas for how to write the next MPEP. I love that he is encouraging Examiners to work with the applicants to find the patentable subjects matter. Way to go, Kappos.
As an EE I have worked on everything from mechanical, to materials to battery chemistry. The areas I have not worked in are pure molecular chemistry such as pharmaceuticals, and plant patents.
I have seen a bit of interest from biotech/chemistry people in EE/CS as the biotech/chemistry stuff becomes more information processing intensive. Typically, questions like how do you write a claim to, and will this get by Bilski.
Frankly, I’ve seen some things that are remarkably like computer science in chemistry.
What are others experience?
I don’t see much biotech/chemical mix between mechanical/EE. A bit. I’ve helped someone with a master’s degree in chemistry write an EE application, but it is very rare.
To what extent does a big law firm in the USA expect its patent attorneys to be able to handle all subject matter? Here in Europe, it is well understood that EE’s don’t do biotech, and vice versa. Chemists can’t write good claims to devices, and engineers can’t write good claims to an invention that is a “molecule X”.
I don’t know of a single US practitioner with a background in say ME that would try and write claims towards a chemical compound. But I do see practitioners work closely to, but outside of, their technical expertise all of the time and usually they are more than competent to do so. Sometimes you see some practitioners that shouldn’t be working outside of their technical expertise (and in some cases, probably shouldn’t be practicing law), but I consider this the exception.
A comical situation arises when you get your first office action and it looks like a fresh-hire examiner examined completely different application: not a shred of understanding the subject matter
Sometimes that happens because the agent doesn’t understand the claims he drafted. The examiner will tend to cite the first reference he finds that invalidates his interpretation of the claim. If it’s not the interpretation the agent had in mind, it can definitely seem a bit unusual.
Still, if your claim really does admit of the examiner’s interpretation, you should try to stop laughing long enough to amend it.
More importantly, if a patent application requires a PhD to understand it, then it was poorly written. Of course, you probably think that most jurors (and judges) have PhDs as well, right?
That’s an excellent point. Even if the law only requires you to write for a PhD with 20 years of field experience, you should still be writing with a judge and jury in mind if you want your patent to hold its value.
“Over the last several years, they have been making it a little too easy to get reg numbers”
Not sure about this – I think the pass rate on the exam has been in a fairly consistent 60% range for the better part of the last ten years.
“What they need are seasoned PhDs with years of industry experience who can grasp the essence of new ideas presented to them by patent applicants (who are also PhDs for the most part)”
Inventors in most art units are NOT PhDs, they are engineers with a BS or maybe an MS degree. More importantly, if a patent application requires a PhD to understand it, then it was poorly written. Of course, you probably think that most jurors (and judges) have PhDs as well, right?
“wouldn’t a mid-career stint as a patent examiner be career suicide?”
Yes.
But perhaps some have not found traction in, for example, the BigLaw environment as newly minted attorney with a reg number.
Over the last several years, they have been making it a little too easy to get reg numbers, and thus have created a bit of a glut at the low end of attorneys who have no training and little in the way of real claim drafting skills or even analytical skills.
I remember one new guy that I trained had a real problem with analyzing and responding to rejections. He would spend all day reading the references. It takes certain skill sets that not everyone possesses to be good at this work. A stint at the PTO might be a good choice for someone who lacks the fundamental skills to excel at patent law.
“Further, in real world cutting edge areas like telecom protocols and biotech, how far away from a PhD is the notional PHOSITA? Not a million miles, I imagine.”
Good point, Max
The present reality at the USPTO is this: a large percentage of all high-tech patent apps are made by highly-specialized PhD level researchers (most of them workign for large corporations like IBM, Intel, MShit, Google etc but some independents too) but examined by fresh-hire examiners who just got their BS EE or CS degrees
A comical situation arises when you get your first office action and it looks like a fresh-hire examiner examined completely different application: not a shred of understanding the subject matter
Yes, guys, modern high-tech can be very complex and math-intensive subject
YOu need more than basic knowledge of IP (and a crappy EE/CS BS degree) to examine patents in those fields
Much much more
As far as I know many EPO examiners do have PhD degrees in their respective fields
Oh, and I am talking about technical and not legal experience, before you jump on that.
MVS
fatalist,
The LAST thing you guys should want are PHDs, or even long-term industry people & the like. Most of them, though there are a few exceptions, know the material so well that they think just about EVERYTHING is obvious or “out there somewhere”.
People just out of school tend to have a more open mind, in general, and don’t think that they know it all. And, when actually given a chance, are usually willing to learn how to properly do things rather than wanting to do it “their way”.
Most of the worst examiners I have had to train over the years have been those that worked in industry 10-20 years.
MVS
“I’m bored.”
You’re fired.
I can well appreciate that working as an Examiner beats collecting unemployment compensation, but for the experienced attorney with a reg. number, wouldn’t a mid-career stint as a patent examiner be career suicide? I don’t see why any experienced person with options would choose to do this.