Patent Office Insider Funnels $500k To Minister

from the ah,-the-uspto dept

This certainly isn't a condemnation of the USPTO itself, but apparently a financial analyst within the PTO worked with a minister to steal more than $500,000. The minister has plead guilty, but the PTO employee is still just under investigation:

One of the patent employee's tasks was to process requests for funds from customers who had completed the application process, documents said. In his guilty plea, Reid said the patent office employee identified accounts that had gone dormant. She then changed the name on the accounts to Redeemed Music House and wired the cash to the company's bank account.

Court documents show that the patent worker stole a total of $534,338 over 32 transfers, 27 of which were to Reid. It is unclear from documents where the other $80,000 went.

This is obviously a scam by a corrupt employee, but a couple folks submitted it, noting that with so much interest in the USPTO around these parts, some folks might be interested. It's certainly not a condemnation of the USPTO (it does plenty of things officially for that), as it's pretty clearly a bad employee scamming money.

10 Comments | Leave a Comment..

US Patent Office Does Initial Rejection On All Claims For Patent On Creating Subdomains

from the so-why-was-it-approved-in-the-first-place? dept

You may recall, a few years back, some news around a patent holding company getting a patent on virtual subdomains. As part of its Patent Busting project, the EFF submitted a ton of prior art to the Patent Office, who has now done an initial rejection of all of the patent's claims. The patent holder (and, it's worth pointing out that it's changed hands since this started) can now respond or just give up on the patent. Either way though, it highlights the silliness of considering any granted patent as automatically "valid." Considering how many patents that are reviews end up having claims (sometimes all of them) rejected, it seems pretty clear that the initial patent review is simply not even close to effective as a judge of patent-worthiness.

8 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Shouldn't Patent QA Specialists Get Things Right More Than 75% Of The Time?

from the even-25%-sounds-high dept

A recent lawsuit sheds even more light on just how poor quality control is at the US Patent & Trademark Office. The lawsuit specifically was over the firing of a quality assurance specialist, who's supposed to review patent examiner decisions to determine if errors were made in granting or rejecting claims. The guy was fired after it turned out that a random review showed his reviews erred 35% of the time. The guy complained that it was just a random sample rather than looking across his entire body of work, but that's not all that interesting here. What's more interesting is that apparently the "reasonable" cutoff for such QA specialists is a 25% error rate. Considering that their entire job is supposed to be double checking the work of patent examiners, you would think that getting one in four claims reviewed wrong would be ringing some pretty big alarm bells concerning the quality of any patent. No wonder so many patents are adjusted when re-examined. Even worse, the guy claims that his 35% error rate wasn't really that bad, saying that his colleagues often erred 45 to 50% of the time. What sort of QA is it that can barely QA itself?

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Patent Boss Admits That The Patent Office Keeps Getting Flooded By More And More Bad Patents

from the gee...-I-wonder-why... dept

The head of the US Patent Office, Jon Dudas, the same guy who was just hyping up a educational curriculum for children falsely claiming that any inventor "needs" to get a patent, is now complaining that the Patent Office is being overwhelmed with really crappy patent applications. You think? Lerner and Jaffe pointed this out years ago and it's not difficult to see why. With the USPTO approving tons of bad patents, and the courts all too often siding with the patent holder and expanding what's patentable, combined with people who have done nothing getting hundreds of millions just for holding a piece of paper, is it really any surprise that the incentive structure would push people to file for as many bogus patents as possible, in hopes of getting them through the obviously questionable process?

When you set up a system that rewards people for not actually innovating in the market (but just speculating on paper), then of course, you're going to get more of that activity. When you set up a system that rewards those people to massive levels, well out of proportion with their contribution to any product, then of course you're going to get more of that activity. When you set up a system that gives people a full monopoly right that can be used to set up a toll booth on the natural path of innovation, then of course you're going to get more of that activity. When the cost of getting a patent is so much smaller than the potential payoff of suing others with it, then of course you're going to get more of that activity. The fact that Dudas is just noticing this now, while still pushing for changes that will make the problem worse is a real problem. Patents were only supposed to be used in special cases. The fact that they've become the norm, rather than the exception is a problem, and it doesn't seem like anyone is seriously looking into fixing that.

38 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Patent Office Agrees To Review Infamous JPEG Patent

from the well,-that's-good dept

Last month, we noted that there was some effort being made to get the Patent Office to do a re-exam of a patent that attorney Ray Niro had been using to go after any site that had a JPEG image. While the patent itself had been re-examed before, one claim had been left intact, which Niro has said covers anyone using JPEG compression. It appears that the effort to get the USPTO to look into the patent once again has succeeded, though it's a long and rather involved process that won't come to fruition for quite a long time. The request includes a long list of prior art on that one particular claim, which the Patent Office admits it did not look at earlier and that raise substantial questions about the patentability of the remaining claim in the patent. This is rather good news.

On a side note, we first came across the story of this patent thanks to the then-anonymous Patent Troll Tracker blog. A few weeks back, the author of that blog revealed himself (after being told anonymously that the news was about to leak in an unflattering manner) as a lawyer working on IP issues at Cisco. It's too bad that he felt the need to reveal himself, but it's even worse that he has since taken down the blog entirely. It had a lot of excellent background information, which is all gone now, and the lack of updates is a real loss. It was the only source that was providing insight into some of the shadier activities of certain patent holders and patent attorneys. It's a world that needed more light shined upon, not less. It's a true shame that it's been lost to the world, much to the detriment of those trying to show how the patent system is being regularly abused.

21 Comments | Leave a Comment..