An inventor recently had an experience with the USPTO we thought would help shed light on just how bad things are for us there. In this instance the inventor had a case which had been pending for several years -more than 8. The case was taken up by the Board which affirmed all rejections of the Examiner while intentionally ignoring the arguments and evidence presented in the applicant’s briefs. This reminds us of the experiences of laser inventor Gordon Gould with the PTO back in the 50’s-80’s. His story is recounted in N Taylor ‘s “Laser”. Here is a link to a Wiki post.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Gould
“The legal battles continued, as the laser industry sought to not only prevent the Patent Office from issuing Gould’s remaining patents, but also to have the already-issued ones revoked. ”
As Taylor writes near page 246 in his book, it didn’t matter what Gould and his attorneys said, the PTO examiner always responded “Gould’s arguments are unpersuasive”. That type of PTO chicanery is still being practiced by the present PTO regime. So it gives every appearance the secret SAWS program at the PTO is alive and flourishing. Are large infringers still manipulating, directing and/or and influencing PTO management? The PTO has proven over decades that it cannot be trusted with determining patentability once a controversy has arisen. This is why we have separation of powers in the federal government -to provide independent oversight. To give any department or subdivision of government the power to both acknowledge and deny a property right is like a one legged dog -one in which the master will through outside influence peddling be forever in substantial question.
In this present and recent administrations the office in select cases obstructs us from obtaining and enforcing our patents, forcing us to sue or go away quietly. Is it the Patent Office, or the Patent Rejection Office? Large multinationals obtain their patents routinely in under 2 years while our applications languish only to await eventual final rejection and trigger finger abandonment. But few inventors have the means to sue the PTO as did Gould so they are ground into dust. The behavior of these PTO administrations is not surprising when one considers that in recent history directors are frequently appointed who are former employees of large infringers (thieves). We have to ask, who are they working for? To give the PTO not only the power to award patents, but the power to revoke as with post issue administrative review is not only an egregious denial of our constitutionally recognized right to a trial by jury, but violates any separation of powers and is devoid of independent oversight. PTO post issue review MUST end.
Meanwhile, those same large infringers who appear to be pulling the strings at the PTO continue to ship more and more American jobs offshore. When they can’t export jobs they import workers.
For our position and the changes we advocate (the rest of the truth) to truly reform the patent system, or to join our effort, please visit us at https://aminventorsforjustice.wordpress.com
or, contact us at aifj@mail.com
American Inventors for Justice 