The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced a call for nominations for membership in its esteemed Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) and the Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC).
These committees were established under the Patent and Trademark Office Efficiency Act in 1999 with the task of advising the Secretary of Commerce and the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property on patent and trademark operations, including agency management, goals, performance, budgets, and user fees. Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, has repeatedly highlighted the central role of these committees in helping her to guide the agency’s strategic actions and upholding the robust IP system that powers American innovation.
Each committee is composed of nine voting members who are chosen by the Secretary of Commerce to serve a three-year term. The USPTO is seeking nominations for up to three members for both the PPAC and the TPAC. The term for new members will begin on December 1, 2023. The deadline for nominations, which must be submitted electronically or postmarked, is July 3, 2023. If you are a U.S. citizen with a strong background in finance, management, labor relations, science, technology, or office automation, this could be your opportunity to influence the landscape of IP and promote innovation on a significant platform.
Here are three key goals for the next PPAC that I would promote:
1. Persistently advocating for the highest quality patent examination and to ensure enforceable patent rights. Much like a constant gardener, this task requires ongoing attention to accommodate the continual emergence of new innovation.
2. Harnessing ‘born digital’ opportunities to enhance efficiencies in patent examination and technology dissemination. This involves embracing digital transformation to revolutionize our approach to patent processes.
3. Championing the potential of beneficial innovation and the critical task of acknowledging that each individual possesses innate genius and transformative potential. It’s inspiring to witness the astounding results that can spring from establishing an environment that fosters growth and exploration.
To apply for membership in the PPAC or TPAC, please find the application forms at the following links:
More Details: https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/uspto-seeks-nominations-patent-and-trademark-public-advisory-committees-0
LinkedIn Post: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/patentlyo_you-can-help-shape-policies-that-support-activity-7074365933271617538-1mqU
Greg, Philadelphia and St. Louis have huge problems.
But what is that problem? It sure looks like from the numbers that the problem is lawlessness in disadvantaged predominately black people neighborhoods.
Not that the USA has too many guns.
“It’s typical MAGA fever brain dog poo. But please continue with your awesome “critical thinking skills” that you’re all so convinced you have.”
You are NOT ALLOWED to have any opinion that does not align with the Sprint Left narrative.
Never mind that actually (gasp) thinking about the black-on-black elements of crime might actually lead to solutions (those solutions ESPECIALLY in long-dominated “D” enclaves in which black-on-black crime and notably gun violence WAS the point that you had attempted to put on the table).
[T]he problem is lawlessness in disadvantaged predominately black people neighborhoods. Not that the USA has too many guns.
Why are these held out as mutually exclusive hypotheses? I do not see why both cannot be simultaneously relevant observations.
Heel to the narrative…
Or else.
The “(lack of) Intelligencer is at it again.
(but Greg is not signaling…
)
Greg cannot see because he refuses to veer off-narrative.
Is that a realistic solution to remove the guns?
Doesn’t seem possible to me. I wouldn’t really care if they could get all the guns and it didn’t just turn into criminals have guns but not regular citizens.
Not only NOT realistic, but one that repudiates our history and invites tyranny (from within as well as from without).
OT, but well worth the listen as the sins of Big Pharma are taken to task:
link to open.spotify.com
Nice article by Prof. Robinson above this article on this site. I worked with him at a big law firm eons ago. He is super-smart and a real nice person as well.
As long as he gets privilege because of his skin color.
From the blocked comments post (one more current than this one):
“This proposed consortium seeks to accomplish three primary objectives:
1. Increase the number of patent agents that identify as belonging to an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
2. Foster informed inventors that identify as belonging to an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
3. Increase the number of patent attorneys in the United States that identify as belonging to an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.”
1. and 3. are repulsive b1g0ted objectives.
It simply does not matter the “identity politics” of the non-inventor in spurring on ANY diversity from inventors.
This Wokeness is a serious blight.
Dennis can do what he wants, but I’d be surprised if any significant number of readers care for these diversity posts. I reflexively scroll past them, but can’t always tell right away and become very slightly annoyed each time. It’s as if you had a favorite TV show, and one day it’s become 40% ads. I keep hoping this series is over, but apparently we’re not done just yet.
“I keep hoping this series is over”
It’s a lifelong affliction bro, as is the DIE spam in the federal government email systems nowadays. The higher ups are just using it to signal how virtuous they are at this point, as well as likely justifying bigotry in hiring for positions on occasion. It’s practically the only type of actual communication they do with the corps (and I’m sure it’s similar in other gov orgs).
I think they should just increase the incentives for existing agents/ attorneys/ inventors to ID as belonging to an underrepresented racial or ethnic group or se x group. Probably can be done on the cheap. It’s likely that many of them are already leftist and will be happy to help out. Maybe just have a yearly pizza party for those that will openly ID as such. Costs like 100 bucks per year per firm and may work wonders for diversity.
Simple as.
I would comment more on the article but am busy.
“It’s likely that many of them are already leftist and will be happy to help out. ”
What makes you think “many” existing agents/attornesys” are “already leftist”?
Is that a serious question?
(Not snark — you may have been the same person pushing to expand Patent Registration beyond the typical engineering basis)
And it has nothing to with the fact that only 10-20% of black high school students graduate proficient in math and English.
No one wants to address the lack of people in the pipeline. Or why. They just blame everything but the actual problem — the education system.
How many black and hispanics pursue science majors in college? How many blacks and hispanics in the public school system go on to college at all?
This is why I do not quite understand the idea behind the various efforts that Dir. Vidal wants to run to encourage more patents from under-represented community inventors. It is a noble goal to ensure that the U.S. is making the best use of all our talented people (not just those from the most socioeconomically advantaged demographics), but the diversion of the less-privileged out of the inventor-pipeline happens way upstream of the patent office. The PTO director is just pushing on a string if she wants to expand innovation among underrepresented communities by introducing PTO initiatives.
P”T”O
Well, that’s a bit different stuff from the likes of Greg.
“The PTO director is just pushing on a string”
No, she’s signaling her virtuousness and status.
6,
You are responding to Greg, who has denied the existence of any such “signaling” (even as he himself engages in that very type of signaling).
Plus, he couldn’t even be bothered to remember you are an examiner in his recent listing of examiners that post here.
I saw an interesting statistic. Still want it fact checked. But if you take out the “gun violence” from the top five cities in the USA New York, LA, Philadelphia, Houston, and Chicago, that the USA is like 200th in the world in “gun violence.” Down from #1.
“Still want it fact checked.”
No you don’t really. Because even when it completely disproves all the “truths” that you heard on Faux News, Newsmaxx, OANN, etc., you still won’t believe the actual truth.
Here’s some fact checking for you though anyway.
link to statista.com
link to alarms.org
“No you don’t really.” Yeah, I really do. And do you disagree with or agree with the statistic. You didn’t answer that.
So painful Dennis having to suffer from these Woke people responding to every post they disagree with using smear tactics.
Statista is per state, not per city.
Alarms is about violent crime and rate. Also, the problem with rates for cities of different sizes is the stats get spread throughout a big city, to include areas that are much more safe and areas that are much more dangerous, averaging it out to make the rate look better.
If one were to subtract the gun homicide raw numbers of the top 5 US cities with the most gun homicides, NW’s comment may prove true.
“…the problem with rates for cities of different sizes is the stats get spread throughout a big city, to include areas that are much more safe and areas that are much more dangerous, averaging it out to make the rate look better.”
So the fact that Tulsa’s murder rate/100,000 people is more than twice NYC’s (18.6 for Tulsa and 8.39 for NYC) is what, meaningless, because, …? Because NYC is a bigger city?
St. Louis’s murder rate is eight times higher than NYC’s murder rate. And about 2.5 times higher than Chicago’s murder rate.
But Hannity and Tucker and Gutfeld don’t talk about St. Louis. Or Kansas City (almost 4 times NYC’s) or Indianapolis (twice NYC’s). But they do talk about big bad SCARY NYC and Chicago.
I wonder why that is? (Not really, I know why that is.)
Did I say meaningless? The rate can be misleading for a large city with different areas of varying degrees of safety. For example, the crime rate in Rittenhouse Square of Philadelphia is very different from Strawberry Mansion.
What are the total gun homicides for each city you list?
So your “point” is that a city with 8.8 million people (NYC) has more total murders than a city of 791,000 people (Tulsa)? That’s your point?
“If one were to subtract the gun homicide raw numbers of the top 5 US cities with the most gun homicides, NW’s comment may prove true.”
His comment is not true. It’s typical MAGA fever brain dog poo. But please continue with your awesome “critical thinking skills” that you’re all so convinced you have.
So, you don’t know or don’t want to state.
PM,
If you want to get particular, you could ask for cross-references to the poor portions of cities.
Of course, this might bring up the verboten topic of black on black violence (as opposed to the significant portion of gun violence attributable to suicides).
“If one were to subtract the gun homicide raw numbers of the top 5 US cities with the most gun homicides, NW’s comment may prove true.”
Right up there with “if my grandmother had wheels, she would roll,” and “if I had some ham, I could make a ham sandwich.”
But Hannity and Tucker and Gutfeld don’t talk about St. Louis.
Um, as a native St. Louisan, I assure you that they talk about St. Louis all the time. Did you not live through the discussions of the 2014 riots?
Believe me, my conservative friends send me the clips. St. Louis (or “Saint Lib-ous” as they sometimes like to pronounce it, so as to emphasize that it is a city runs by “libs”) gets discussed in exactly the same tone of voice and with the same arched eyebrows and half wink as “Chicago,” and for exactly the same reason.
“I assure you that they talk about St. Louis all the time. Did you not live through the discussions of the 2014 riots?”
Most of us just ignore anything having to do with a frenchie sounding name TBH bro.
“Saint Lib-ous”
Should be Saaaaint Looooui and Saaaaint Loooouizn. Lol.
That’s an interesting origin story tho Greg, explains quite a bit about you.
Greg’s (hidden) “?” to what amounts to “conspiracy theory” is easily rebuffed with the rather simple observation that so many of those “conspiracy theories” are turning out to be true (courtesy of his own Left ideologues).
Here you go. As I gather that you already suspected, the statistic is not true. Actually, it is wildly off base.
I hope that helps.
“As I gather that you already suspected…”
He didn’t suspect that. Hannity told him that. And he swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.
“And do you disagree with or agree with the statistic.”
It appears that your “statistic” is made up nonsense. So no, I don’t “agree” with it.
Though I have zero doubt that even after Greg completely debunked your “statistic” you still believe it.
“I hope that helps.”
I’m sure it made absolutely no impact on his “thinking.”
More attempts at smearing me I see. Sorry I didn’t get that meme from Hannity.
Breeze, it is also just stunning that after being wrong about the laptop, origins of Covid, the Russian collusion, and so forth that you continue to push false narratives.
Breeze is not “wrong about the laptop, origins of Covid, [or] the Russian collusion… .”
^^^
Oh, really — you must have missed the memo (as gaslighting as it was) that these things are no longer to be denied, but that the Left “never really did” dispute them.
I am amused by Greg’s “…” going once again to the (Or)well.
Incidentally, I am really not clear what the significance of that “statistic” is supposed to be. It is commonplace in the gun-rights community to observe that “guns don’t kill people; people kill people.” If you subtract the five largest population centers from the U.S. totals, but then leave other nations’ large population centers in their counts, you are not making anything like an apples-to-apples comparison.
It is a testament to our outlier gun violence rate that we are still way up in the violence rankings even after subtracting the top five homicide jurisdictions. Really, it should drop us way down the rankings, if you make an apples-to-oranges comparison like that. As Breeze already noted, however, when Mississippi and Louisiana lead the gun violence counts, it turns out that even excluding large population centers does not much affect our ranking.
A”n”other visit to the [Or]well…
^^^ classic gaslighting by Greg.
Greg, that doesn’t seem right as there were 500 murders in Philadelphia alone.
I think that the point is that –in reality–most of the problem is coming from disadvantaged black people areas. I just don’t see how problems get fixed when you don’t identify the problem. Yes there are many other problems. Biden’s fentanyl is causing massive problems.
[T]here were 500 murders in Philadelphia alone.
Once again, I do not know where you are getting your numbers, but this is not true. The meme that you were citing about U.S.’s worldwide ranking was from 2018. The Philadelphia police department counted only 353 homicides in 2018.
Your link regarded 2016, didn’t it?
My apologies, you are correct. 2016, not 2018. In 2016 Philadelphia had 277 homicides.
Beatnik time has been moved to 6:22 PM.
Dig it.
Regardless, Philadelphia had 562 homicides in 2021. That is more than double what it was in 2015. So, we have a problem.
+1
I agree that 562 homicides is a problem. Heck, even 250 homicides is a problem. Even 10 homicides is a problem.
Nevertheless, the 2021 count of 562 does not get one any closer to making NW’s “statistic” accurate. The earlier numbers concerned 2016. In 2016, Philadelphia had 277 homicides out of national total of 17250.
Meanwhile, in 2021 Philadelphia had 562 homicides, NYC had 488, Chicago had 836, Houston had 473, & LA had 397, while the U.S. as a whole had 22900 homicides that year. Those five cities, therefore, amount to only ~12% of the nation’s total.
Additionally, the UN rankings count homicides per capita. If we exclude NYC, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Philadelphia from the homicide counts, we also need to exclude their populations from the denominator of the “per capita” calculation. Those cities, in 2021, had 18.878 million inhabitants, while the U.S. population total was 331.9 million. Thus the homicide rate (homicides per 100k people) without those five cities in 2021 would have been 8.8 per 100k, whereas the reported homicide rater for the U.S. in 2021 was 6.9 per 100k.
In other words, the homicide rate would increase, not decrease, if you omit those five cities, as NW’s “statistic” suggests. It simply remains the case that excluding those cities that NW names does not result in the putative improvement in our statistical ranking—whether you look at the 2016 numbers, the 2021 numbers, or some other year’s numbers.
The whole thing is nonsense. You can, as they say, look it up and do the math. There is no reason for an intelligent person to continue to cling to this made up “fact” when it is so easy to check for oneself and confirm that it is not true.
“Once again [your numbers are wrong]”
.., numbers are shown to be correct..
Well… [some other noxious, disagreeing statement]…
^^^ classic gaslighting.
+1
I know. Greg tells me repeatedly that my number is wrong and then figures out it is right and then goes off on more nonsense.
The issue is that most of the problem is actually from the disintegration of black culture in disadvantaged areas. Yes, there are lots of other problems. And lots of white disadvantaged areas are just as bad.
Your numbers are wrong. You cited a “statistic” about the U.S. homicide rate dropping over 100 places In worldwide rankings. I track that “statistic” to a claim about 2016 homicide counts, and provide you a link showing that the 2016 numbers do not bear out your claim.
You respond by noting that Philadelphia’s homicide counts were higher in years after the one relevant to your “statistic.” In particular, PM notes that Philadelphia’s 2021 counts were above 500. I cite you the FBI and UN numbers from 2021 and do the math for you to show that even with the 2021 numbers, your “statistic” does not hold up.
Nevertheless, you still think that your “statistic” is supportable? Fair enough—where do spot the inaccuracy in the cited data, or the error in my calculations? Surely you can point to something more verifiably and particularly relevant than just to toss around the word “nonsense.” This is math. Math is either correct or incorrect, and if you want to call it “nonsense,” you should be able to identify the specific error.
Self-serving “P” nonsense — right up Greg’s alley (as is typical).
But he’s not gaslight1ng anyone now, is he…
Wait, so even with all our bad guns, when one looks at “rate,” the US is NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 50? Wow! Thanks Greg!
From Greg’s link:
“As the country with the third-highest population size, however, experts told us the number of people killed is not a very useful metric.
Controlling for population size, most criminologists use the per 100,000 metric. By that standard, we found the United States ranked 94th.
When we counted only the countries for which the UN had 2015 data, the United States ranked 73rd. That’s still far from the top ten.”
Glad that I could brighten your day like that. I always want for folks to look on the bright side.
I confess, however, that I am hard pressed to square your relief to find out that we are “only” 94th worldwide for homicides with your assertion in 6.4.2.3.1.2 that we have a problem because Philadelphia saw 562 homicides in 2021. That is what the 94th worst homicide rate looks like—562 homicides in one year in a major city. If it is a problem when you phrase it as “Philadelphia,” why is it not a problem when you phrase it as “we are about in line with Zimbabwe in terms of homicide rate”?
“I always want folks to look on the bright side…”
[but… still noxious and disagreeing — even after being wrong, yet again]
^^^ more gaslighting.
It’s as if being trained in the ways of Big Pharma, Greg simply does not even recognize his gaslighting nature.
Greg, Philadelphia and St. Louis have huge problems.
But what is that problem? It sure looks like from the numbers that the problem is lawlessness in disadvantaged predominately black people neighborhoods.
Not that the USA has too many guns.
+ 1
Patent Mom.
“I saw an interesting statistic.”
Good grief what a sad c l o w n show.
The Woke smear game.
If you just look at the percentages of kids who did well in high school, then it fits the same percentages as the people with careers as attorneys.
I want to see more white guys in the NBA. They’re underrepresented.
/s/
… how exactly would equity work in the NBA?
+1
“Persistently advocating for the highest quality patent examination”
How many years do you reckon you will have to advocate for this to get it to commence?
The PTO has been doing record breaking outstanding quality work for decades. Just ask Jim Rogan, Jon Dudas, et al. They’ll tell you.
Lulz
“Persistently advocating for the highest quality patent examination”
Is that intended as written, or is there a subtextual addendum of “at current fee levels”?