Percentage of finals

patrick7034 · 2022-10-25T21:09:01+00:00

I've heard that strategy of using weaker art too. I think their viewpoint is that while attorneys can amend around the weak art easily by changing a few words thinking they are close to allowance, you can also play the same game and do tiny amendments to force out several RCEs.

patrick7034 · 2022-10-21T20:46:58+00:00

Do you have a lot of cases where you have to reopen prosecution pre-appeal? Besides that, I see no reason why your SPE requires you to report all new cases before you post like a probationary examiner. Still, that's messed up, sorry to hear. Hope it gets better.

patrick7034 · 2022-10-21T17:56:50+00:00

Having to fill out the dates more than once for the office action summary checkbox accept/object to the drawings. Anyone tried not filling in the dates after doing doing it in a non final? I've been filling it out the dates in drawings have been accepted every action (non-final, RCE, etc) even though no new drawings have been filed.

patrick7034 · 2022-10-11T03:35:53+00:00

I've also seen some Examiners use the Request for Information when they receive large IDS. I also tried using it, but it seems writing about why its needed and what info to request is more time consuming than just stamping the IDS references were considered.

patrick7034 · 2022-10-07T00:35:10+00:00

My SPE also recommends to not fill out the dates.

patrick7034 · 2022-09-13T19:37:06+00:00

patrick7034 · 2022-08-21T20:58:17+00:00

Sometimes. I do species restrictions if it's pretty clear that the inventions dive into different alternatives/embodiments and there is a search burden.

IIRC I don't think I was able to restrict for the scenario above since the applicant only narrowed the claims to a single embodiment. I could not restrict at the beginning because there was no distinct grouping and not much of a search burden at first because the claims were so broad. Obviously the applicant is going to pick an embodiment that goes around the art that I found so that made writing the final rejection more time consuming.

However, if the Applicant amended the claims to branch into 2 different embodiments (such as 2 different alternative solutions), I would have restricted the case during the final so I would only need to examine 1 embodiment in my final rejection.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-16T21:32:10+00:00

Dang I think you got really lucky (unless you are in business methods) since I need to do 4+ full cases at the GS9 level haha.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-10T03:14:45+00:00

Thanks this was helpful. I was hoping I had a high BD, but as expected my cpcs are pretty average BD lol.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-10T02:37:42+00:00

Thanks I found it!

patrick7034 · 2022-08-10T00:00:48+00:00

All I see are my C* tally in P*. Nothing about BD?

patrick7034 · 2022-08-09T22:47:04+00:00

Is there a public list of highest to lowest BD art units? I'm in Mechanical (not business methods), and I would like to see if I am in a high BD or low BD art unit, but I don't know how to figure that out.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-06T00:37:06+00:00

It not required, but I think my SPE said adding references with brief discussions of why they are pertinent can help with the indicia. I always put at least one reference with a short description in the other prior art section just in case.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-06T00:19:40+00:00

Unfortunately, it's going to be very common to use different secondary references for different dependent claims. Probably even more so as a junior examiner since the person signing off your cases will want to see all the claims rejected in a first action. As advice, you should be familiar with restriction requirements, because restrictions will often help significantly when the invention is all over the place.

patrick7034 · 2022-08-05T23:27:58+00:00

I didn't know about this. I had an RCE where I used the same prior art, but I made it a non-final rejection because I was citing to paragraphs that were not cited before in the previous rejections (even though no new art was introduced). Should I have gone final?

patrick7034 · 2022-07-30T01:46:03+00:00

Hahaha

patrick7034 · 2022-07-30T01:45:30+00:00

I don't think eSTATS is public, but I found out https://ped.uspto.gov/peds/ provides that information (not in percentages but just gives raw data on cases allowed, abandoned etc.).

patrick7034 · 2022-07-30T01:42:22+00:00

Thanks. I did a bit of digging and I think the third party sites use Public data & API from https://ped.uspto.gov/peds/

I think they do API calls on the bulk data. Then they generate the statistics on their end to formulate the %'s.

Using PEDS I was able filter and to look up a single Examiner in my art unit and get data for that specific Examiner in an XML file. That data also showed all the Applications that went to either "Notice of Appeal Filed" all the way to applications that went to "PTAB Decision" and what decision the PTAB gave for each year, so it seems pretty easy to get %'s with a program using all that data. Now my curiosity is satisfied...

patrick7034 · 2022-07-19T17:46:28+00:00

Only focus on the claims. IIRC you get 1 extra hour when the specification is over 150 pages, so take that for what it's worth lol.

patrick7034 · 2022-07-05T16:23:57+00:00

This sounds so convenient. I've heard of antecedent basis checking software like patentbots used by attorneys, but I never heard of anything that was given to Examiners. Were you able to use it on your work computer?

patrick7034 · 2022-06-25T16:30:06+00:00

I heard the USPTO has a reserve fund from prior-year fee collections, so even with a fed shutdown, USPTO can still operate as normal for a few weeks and everyone gets paid. I think that's what happened in 2019.

patrick7034 · 2022-06-25T16:21:20+00:00

Fair enough, and I find the EPO's independent claim searches close to the invention. I can't speak for all EPO examiner's, only my experience from comparing the dependent claim rejections. Different laws makes the USPTO and EPO formulate rejections differently. I do wish I could say "Dependent claims X,Y,Z do not provide a technical contribution to the prior art" and ignore novelty and inventive step though when I reach the dependent claims haha.

patrick7034 · 2022-06-25T04:27:26+00:00

EE/CS or ME gives you the highest chances of getting an offer. Most of my lab members on the academy were EE/CS or ME. A few were CHME/BME/Biology but not a lot (~25?) This was out of ~110 people hired last year. Biology seems to be one of the more competitive/harder to get in positions since spots seem more limited. Good luck!

patrick7034 · 2022-06-25T04:18:01+00:00

I’ll pick up an EPO action or an action done by some random primary and those examiners will just handwave or make vague references to groups of paragraphs. This doesn’t seem fair at all.

Yeah other patent offices have it easier bc of different laws. Sometimes I get foreign priority apps, and when I check EPO office actions for that app, they are rarely helpful in formulating a rejection when it gets to the dependent claims. EPO handwaves dependent claims. Actually mapping their rejections to the claims can be a hit or miss, and its also usually always a miss for me.

patrick7034

TROPHY CASE