My research inquiry – Have you read any great writing on the difference between the process of judging a contested case vs an uncontested (or ex parte) case? [email me: email@example.com]
In the contested situation, a judge is free to be neutral and rely upon the each party to identify deficiencies in the opposing party’s arguments. In the ex parte case, such as patent examination, there is no party voicing opposition. The need for that voice is partially eliminated by the heightened duty of candor in these cases, but only partially. How does the examiner fill the role of both judge and partial voice-of-opposition in this situation?