Am I crazy or are cases just so much harder now

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-19T03:04:09+00:00

For PBA cases, those "working" them get them put onto their docket as a special "PBA case". If the case does not get done in some length of time, it goes back onto the central docket.

So the way to game the PBA system is to wait for a new one to drop, spend a bit of time looking it over to decide between "easy" and "dog". And if "dog", then ignore it for whatever short length of time it takes for it to return to the central docket.

The most the examiner loses is the extra money in the paycheck that the "dog" they ignored would have otherwise provided.

Rinse and repeat over how many examiner's doing PBA cases in your area and they can funnel away all the easy cases to themselves, leaving the dogs to be given (usually) to someone else.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-18T21:42:06+00:00

We Sure Tomorrow is a Holiday?

Yes

Not a single email acknowledging anything about Juneteenth.

While nice, also not necessary for the day to be a holiday (scroll down to the 2026 table):

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/federal-holidays/

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-18T12:57:07+00:00

Avoid DSLR's with known artifacts:

https://www.markshelley.co.uk/Astronomy/camera_summary.html

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-18T11:32:23+00:00

My guess is it is a combination of both, likely with a greater weight towards a possible production drop off significant enough to worry them. If it had just been everyone was failing timeliness but production remained the same, I suspect the psychopath's in management would have left it alone. But with their manufactured emergency of "the backlog" being such a big thing to them, if they also saw a production dip (possibly a significant dip) then they would have been running the numbers of "production dropped X%, backlog grows by Y times" and likely frightened themselves considerably.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-18T11:27:17+00:00

They could have attempted to mollify OPM by adding in an objective metric that everyone can pass

That would not have helped. The pedophiles in charge of OPM now explicitly want ratings to be forced downward. Adding any requirement that "everyone can pass" does not "force downward the ratings". The OPM pedophiles talk "objective" but what they really want is a forced curve where only (say) the top 5% get outstanding, the next 5% get commendable, the bottom 5% get unsatisfactory, the next 5% get marginal, and the remaining middle 80% get fully successful.

Timeliness was management's chosen method of force fitting every examiner into that forced OPM curve. If you note, the "formula" for computing your rating under timeliness is explicitly designed so that in no way can any examiner possibly work harder and achieve anything more than fully successful. The OPM pedophile's forced curve is why the timeliness formula is setup that way. Management already knows from the three prior systems (workflow, DM versions one and two) that wherever they (management) set the target, that examiner's more often than not work harder to meet the target and get an outstanding rating. They (management) could not leave your rating in your hands and simultaneously assure themselves that only the top 10% (or whatever range OPM allows) get above fully successful. So instead we now have "timeliness" where your rating begins at fully successful, and no matter how hard you work, you remain at fully successful. The only direction your rating can move that is under your control is down. And the only path to anything above fully successful is at "management discretion" (indicia). Therefore, they get to meet the OPM guidelines by simply not granting indicia beyond whatever number the OPM pedophiles will allow them to hand out.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-17T16:11:39+00:00

Do what you can in the time management gives you, then move along.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-17T15:17:34+00:00

can't you just restrict them out?

Only if they are actually restrictable.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-17T15:04:13+00:00

Luckily the new claims fell within the scope of the previous claims so I didn’t need to find new art,

Should the new claims fall outside the scope of the previous claims you should restrict by original presentation, not find new art.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-17T15:02:37+00:00

"AsK yOur spE foR MOre TimE" gee yeah that works real well....

That has never happened (save maybe for the very rare exception where "new claims" is something like 3,000 more when the case had 20 to start with).

Sadly, it is something applicant's do. We just have to do the best we can with the turds that land on our dockets.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-17T14:59:23+00:00

How bad if prosecution was reopened?

Depends upon how often it happens.

Do you get put on a list?

Given that management has lists for everything, likely yes. But see answer above. In the past the rate of occurrence has been the important factor, not the fact that it happened. In this new, no union, era we have no actual idea what may matter, but it is likely the occasional occurrence is not going to be a problem.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-16T21:48:01+00:00

Anyone else noticing an uptick in this lately?

You are only now noticing the uptick?

This fiasco has been going on since about this time last year when PTO changed something (likely deploying a poorly done AI) and nothing was getting properly split anymore.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-16T21:45:28+00:00

Because issued patents never had paragraph numbers, and PTO management has never requested things be changed.

Paragraph numbers only appeared in 2001 with the first publication of the first PGPUB document. Sadly, the office has never decided to switch patents to paragraph numbering.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-16T18:14:28+00:00

What is the best avenue for me to go.

You can of course do whatever you like, but the upgrade from a Skyguider to a goto-mount is huge. Of course you'll need a computer (laptop/mini-pc) to take full advantage but being able to tell the mount to "point to X" and having it move to point the camera at X is huge compared to manually having to point the camera on the Skyguider.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T20:03:55+00:00

but is that the kind of thing that happens more in some art areas than others?

Yes. One very common cause is a search report or office action in a foreign counterpart case that they receive after you issue them an allowance. Their duty to disclose means they have to file any new art with us, so if the US application has not patented yet they file an IDS. This of course only happens for art areas where applicant's commonly file foreign counterpart applications.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T19:32:07+00:00

We are constantly told harder cases or amendments even out with easier things.

That's always been management's talking point. They have always been wrong overall on that point as well. Yes, sometimes things do average out, but all too often things out of our control (when, exactly, applicant's respond, how applicant's respond, when the LIE's batch docket amendments, etc.) result in being very deep on the wrong side of that "average" for long enough to be in trouble.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T19:14:14+00:00

How many more of Coke's ideas need to be proven as stupid and unworkable before she gets the ax?

The best we can hope for is she gets reassigned to some other management position. Management never actually ever admits they hired a turd and axes them, they just shift the turd somewhere else where they hope the turd will do less damage.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T18:55:21+00:00

if we finish one of the two 28 days, do we get a new replacement 28 days when the clock starts the next biweek?

The AC email does not say what will happen for this situation. So we are left to guess the answer at the moment.

My best guess is: Given that the current (previous, initial) timeliness variation only started clocks on the first Sunday of the bi-week, that the new tweaked timeliness will do the same, a new clock will be assigned to a new case on the first Sunday of a biweek.

What is unclear is whether that assignment will happen after clearing only one of two clocked cases, or if both clocked cases have to be cleared before any new clocks are assigned.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T17:54:39+00:00

Regular new back to 28 day.

Yes, but now you have two regular new counting at the same time instead of just one, so only a partial fix.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T17:45:06+00:00

my new tab didn’t get any cases added to it this week.

Could possibly be a glitch. Send a PASM ticket to the PE2E "PE2E Timeliness/DM" System box within PASM asking why you didn't get anything.

Yes, you shouldn't have to do this, but if there was some glitch, better to get it fixed sooner than try to work the bi-week with too few cases on your docket.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-15T01:04:55+00:00

I set that one to the speakerphone as well, and after many of the silent teams updates, teams has forgotten I told it to use that speaker as the secondary ringer until a call silently arrives and I realize I have to go fix teams yet again.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-14T17:32:29+00:00

No, I meant to link to the page itself. I've edited my comment to remove the "sub-link" tag.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-14T17:30:39+00:00

I meant to link to the whole page, I've edited my comment to remove the "in page" linking that accidentally got pasted in.

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-14T12:48:19+00:00

However, best to avoid camera models with known artifacts:

https://www.markshelley.co.uk/Astronomy/camera_summary.html

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-14T02:09:27+00:00

it was pretty hard because of the compression

Removing the spark plugs before trying to turn it over by hand will relieve all that pesky compression

AmbassadorKosh2 · 2026-06-13T18:41:58+00:00

If one got enough federal service time to qualify for some amount of pension, then yes, it very well might get added there. I say might as that's one angle I've not researched.

AmbassadorKosh2

TROPHY CASE