PPAC 2022 Annual Report

The Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) includes nine voting members appointed by the Secretary of Commerce.  The committee is charged with reviewing “policies, goals, performance, budget, and user fees of the United States Patent and Trademark Office … and advise the Director on these matters.”  35 USC 5. The statute also charges the committee with preparing an annual report.  This year’s report is one of the most thoughtful that I have read and focuses the adjectives that we’d like to see in our patent system:  accessible, predictable, durable, enforceable, affordable, and understandable patent rights.

Read the report here: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PPAC-2022_annual-report.pdf

16 thoughts on “PPAC 2022 Annual Report

      1. 3.1.1

        The things in one’s personal life can creep into work life and no one is exempt from having a bad day. For me, going to a SPE because of an Examiner’s behavior has fortunately been a rarity during my career. I’ve gone to SPEs for other reasons but rarely because of unprofessional behavior by the Examiner. If I have a client that has a lot of applications in one particular art unit, I don’t want bad relationships with the Examiners in that art unit. However, to be an advocate for my client, I also need to have zero tolerance for bad behavior by an Examiner that crosses the line. Everyone is entitled to have a bad day but having a bad day does not excuse bad behavior by an Examiner any more than it excuses a patent practitioner from violating Rule 1.3.

        1. 3.1.1.2

          Your post seems to be addressing behavior far beyond surly.

          “to be an advocate for my client, I also need to have zero tolerance for bad behavior by an Examiner that crosses the line.”

          Really? I would imagine that it’d be your job to put up with a personally abusive examiner if you had reason to believe they’d quickly grant a desirable scope to your client. Like say they called you up to get permission for an examiner’s amendment that only corrects a typo, while also directing some racial epithets at you. What if you complain, get that examiner removed from the case, and then find yourself in front a polite and professional examiner who doesn’t think the claim is allowable?

          1. 3.1.1.2.1

            Surly behavior is one thing. Outright unprovoked hostility is another.

            “I would imagine that it’d be your job to put up with a personally abusive examiner”

            No, it’s not, and if you give an inch to a bully, they will take a mile. You push back on them….hard! Someone who is acting out of character based on previous experiences with them, you cut them the same amount of slack you’d want them to cut you if you had a bad day but I’ll still go to the SPE, and even the TC Director if the SPE is non-responsive. It’s one thing for an Examiner to tell you to appeal if you’ve reached an impasse in prosecution. Their position may seem unreasonable but you can agree to disagree (e.g., the Examiner cherry-picks certain features from a reference while my position is that the Examiner is ignoring the combined teachings of the references which require other modifications to the primary reference that render it unsuitable for its intended use or go outside the scope of the claim). It’s quite another for an Examiner to spew out that they hope never to have another one of your applications in front of them again. Courtesy and decorum is a two way street.
            I’ve spoke with a few TC Directors in my day in regards to bad conduct by Examiners during prosecution.

  1. 2

    Yes, I am going to have to call B$ on the assertions at the beginning of this report.

    Namely,

    It also has been a year of significant progress on each of the key priorities:
    1. Improving the reliability and durability of the patent right;
    2. Expanding the number of people who engage the U.S. patent system as inventors, particularly in under-represented constituencies and geographies; and
    3. Being good financial stewards so that patent system is efficient, affordable and accessible.

    Significant progress is NOT measured merely by efforts undertaken. RESULTS are what signify progress, not mere actions.

    Let’s not confuse ‘activity’ with progress. I would daresay that absent any actual results, NONE of the key priorities have had any actual progress (let alone significant progress).

    1. 2.1

      anon, seriously? Progress by the federal government is measured in effort not results. And the effort is measured subjectively.

  2. 1

    “The USPTO’s use of artificial intelligence (AI) and IT to improve classification and search is
    commendable.”

    Well, that’s enough rubbish for me. These people either don’t know what they’re talking about, or they don’t care.

    1. 1.1

      “Well, that’s enough rubbish for me. These people either don’t know what they’re talking about, or they don’t care.”

      Nah they went over the new similarity search tool the other day. I have to say it does half decent. Not great, but half decent. Basically the same kind of results you’d get if you put a GS5 on the case and he didn’t get lucky.

      And, further, and perhaps most important, the new similarity tool actually gasp does a decent job at bringing up similar sub-groups if not the exact ones needed on a few cases I tried.

      I will give kudos.

      That being said, it’s still a sht pile. But, commendable. In a hundred years we’ll be looking solid.

      1. 1.1.1

        Depends on the tech area then. Where I’m working, it produces complete trash. Worse results than if you asked a high-school drop-out to search the application.

Comments are closed.