4 ms·
Any evidence of moonlighting? Never heard of this, at least in US practice with any prevalence. Would be curious to hear the basis, even if anecdotal.
by josaka 8y ago
Any evidence of moonlighting? Never heard of this, at least in US practice with any prevalence. Would be curious to hear the basis, even if anecdotal.
- jedberg 8y agoI have multiple friends that are part time patent examiners and hold full time jobs otherwise. They are experts in their fields that get tapped to review patents. Usually they get the job because they have filed a bunch of patents. Edit: For the record, I don't think any of my friends are corrupt. In fact, they're the most ethical people I know and take the job very seriously. I'm just saying it could happen if the examiner were already inclined to corruption.
- tripletao 8y agoSo I'm clear: You're saying that your friends work part-time for the USPTO examining patents? Like, they're paid by the USA government to read patent applications, and help determine whether each claim is allowed or rejected? It's very common for experienced engineers to review patents for private companies (to help them judge whether they infringe, assess the commercial value of a portfolio they might buy, etc.). I've never heard of a part-time patent examiner, and I'm interested to learn more--the conflicts of interest would seem extraordinary.
- patentatt 8y agoYeah, that’s not really a thing. Maybe, just maybe, the PTO may hire consultants on rare occasion to help with a very cutting edge tech, maybe. Perhaps that’s what OP may be referring to? And then I very highly doubt the consultant would be actually examining, more like just consulting on the technology. But it’s not like patent examining is a part time job, that’s just ... not how it works.
- pwg 8y ago> Perhaps that’s what OP may be referring to? What the OP /sounds/ like they may be referring to, given this statement in their reply: > They are experts in their fields that get tapped to review patents. Usually they get the job because they have filed a bunch of patents. Is one of either they get selected to be expert witnesses in either a court case over an issued patent, or they get selected by lawfirms/applicants to provide "expert witness" type material for use by the applicant in rebutting the USPTO examiner's rejections of that applicant's application. It is also possible that what the OP is referencing might be some form of 'internal review' at large corps where 'experts' in given areas provide a first review of potential patent applications from others in the corp. before the corp. goes to the trouble of actually filing a full application with the USPTO. In this case these individuals would be "reviewing patent applications" but they would not be "examining" patent applications which is the term that would be used were these folks to be truly working for the USPTO.
- patentatt 8y agoAgreed, sounds like expert witness work. And if at an IPR trial, it may seem a lot like examination and it’s at the PTO, could see the confusion.
- jeffreyrogers 8y agoI think you're using the term "patent examiner" in an unconventional way. To most people directly involved with patents a patent examiner means someone who is directly employed by the USPTO. This is different than someone who drafts patents for clients or who provides legal advice on patent issues.
- patentatt 8y agoIt’s not unconventional, it’s incorrect and spreading FUD about the validity of the patent system.