That is a good point. There are regional offices, but they are technical field specific. So, if you a not an examiner in a technical field relevant to the satellite office, then you are out of luck. They really should be more flexible on that.
@ My personal opinion about DOGE: I think they’re looking for obvious fat in the system. The more technical the work, the less likely (but not always) they will trim. After 35 years working for a university, I am well aware of campus positions that had spacious offices but rarely an occupant. So the general concept of DOGE is good in my eyes!
Politicians have thumbs, and they need to have people under them - as does the bloated USPTO 'beurocrappy', many of whom are no longer needed, but their are used to the $$ and they are trained to say 'do you want fries with that' as their next job!
The present patent system seeks 2 goals: 1. Protect Intellectual Property (IP), which it does pretty well. 2. Promote invention, which it does HORRIBLY. I see ways to see that inventors receive money in connection with their inventions, WITHOUT the present cumbersome and expensive process. We NEED this debate, that should lead to a system that also works for inventors, in addition to working for industry.
Thank you for your comment Steve! You bring up a topic of extreme interest to me. Does our patent system actually accomplish what we want it to? Does it actually "promote" the useful arts and sciences? If not, how can we improve the situation?
I'm a patent lawyer and the quality of examiners and the time they seem to spend on cases is abysmal, especially after the remote move. Distributed workforce does NOT require working at home - government buildings throughout the US could have office space for patent examiners.
Excellent point. They did establish satellite offices, but the limit the Examiners who are resident at those office to only those examining in the technical fields that are positioned at those offices.
I agree that for the some people, remote work can be a great improvement in efficiency but the problem is that that is not universally the case. The problem is that despite the remote work, patents have become increasingly expensive while the time to approve the has also increased and this is hurting business. I support remote work but the government needs to become more efficient and at least with in-person work, that efficiency can be monitored and improved. Our team works remote and we meeting our project targets. I suspect if we start falling behind, there will be a call for "all hands on deck" and we will all be in the office. If you (or anyone else) has an alternate proposal to reduce wait time without increasing costs, I am all ears. Currently China is completing patent reviews in 14-16mo and issued 1.6 million utility patents in 2024. On the other hand, the US takes 36mo and only released 300,000 patents in 2024. That is ridiculous and embarrassing.
Thank you for your excellent, well-thought out comment! I agree with everything you wrote. My understanding and observation of the work that is performed by Examiners is that it does not involve working in teams at all. Therefore, in-person collaboration is not necessary. Examiners work independently and did so even when they were in the office everyday. The contrast between the overall, high level performance of the U.S. patent office examination system in comparison to those of other countries, I believe could be attributed to the lack of value that our country places in our Examiners. For example, German, Chinese, and Japanese examiners are VERY highly respected and are compensated accordingly. Engineers and scientists from those countries respect and value working at those patent offices. In contrast, the U.S. does not compensate the Examiners at the same level as other countries, let alone the rest of the U.S. job market, therefore, people only go to the patent office if they cannot find a better job and see it as a last resort. If we want efficient, fast, high quality examination, we need to attract better talent to the patent office.
Forcing everyone back into offices will waste more money on office rent and setup, and waste employees’ time and morale on commute travel. Big hit against tax dollar efficiency.
Ending remote work wouldn't make any significant difference at all over the long run and would actually hurt more than help over the short run. I think it's a waste of time and DOGE should focus their efforts elsewhere.
The real problem with Patents is it limits creation, if someone creates a product, do it well and make if affordable for others and this will create demand. I have been involved in the process and I gave up because it was too expensive and there are so many variations you may not be able to create your product even if it exceeds other products by a long shot. You said it its profit and has nothing to do with creation and the betterment of mankind. Sounds like more corporate gobble goop and lets look at a lot of the very poor products produced that are so damn expensive and last half of what they used to. Automobiles would fit that example. How about instead of profits we focus on delivery of sustainable products that do not fill up dump sites and really get what we pay for.
Many jobs do well with home working. So, why not the patent office. I have a few patents on the American system and I'm thousands of miles from them, so, many people will simply not care where they're located. Musk has a habit of annoying some people and I suspect that he may soon start annoying Trump and that may End Musk's interference.
Very insightful! And congratulations on your patents! Personally, I really appreciate being able to work from home, however, I will say that it is nice to occasionally interact with my colleagues in person. Frankly, I think many of us are MORE productive working from home or from wherever we choose to work to be the most productive.
@@rusty-y8r who are "these two con artists"? I heard only plain reporting of fact about what one (non elected) individual says he'd like to do with the patent office. Who was the other individual? By rosey, did you mean the adjective rosy? It's worthwhile listening to what's actually being said and applying some critical thinking to those words before challenging people about doing research. Where Musk is concerned, people haven't far to go to find out what he's been saying. X is right there to get it from the horse's mouth and because he is so prominent, he is being reported on throughout the day and at night sometimes. Musk needs little researching for this level of opinion piece, and that's what it is, an opinion, nothing more, nothing less. I'd have thought anyone with an interest in intellectual property would want to know if a character like Musk was going to poke his nose in, as that could end up detrimental towards anyone trying to protect their IP. If Musk gets involved, I'd be more concerned about him trying to profit from that involvement and we don't need that.
How about the patent office move to “somewhere” else? If most can do their work remote……then DC isn’t a locked in location
That is a good point. There are regional offices, but they are technical field specific. So, if you a not an examiner in a technical field relevant to the satellite office, then you are out of luck. They really should be more flexible on that.
@ My personal opinion about DOGE: I think they’re looking for obvious fat in the system. The more technical the work, the less likely (but not always) they will trim. After 35 years working for a university, I am well aware of campus positions that had spacious offices but rarely an occupant. So the general concept of DOGE is good in my eyes!
Yep, was going to say they can have satellite offices
Politicians have thumbs, and they need to have people under them - as does the bloated USPTO 'beurocrappy', many of whom are no longer needed, but their are used to the $$ and they are trained to say 'do you want fries with that' as their next job!
The present patent system seeks 2 goals:
1. Protect Intellectual Property (IP), which it does pretty well.
2. Promote invention, which it does HORRIBLY.
I see ways to see that inventors receive money in connection with their inventions, WITHOUT the present cumbersome and expensive process. We NEED this debate, that should lead to a system that also works for inventors, in addition to working for industry.
Thank you for your comment Steve! You bring up a topic of extreme interest to me. Does our patent system actually accomplish what we want it to? Does it actually "promote" the useful arts and sciences? If not, how can we improve the situation?
I'm a patent lawyer and the quality of examiners and the time they seem to spend on cases is abysmal, especially after the remote move. Distributed workforce does NOT require working at home - government buildings throughout the US could have office space for patent examiners.
Excellent point. They did establish satellite offices, but the limit the Examiners who are resident at those office to only those examining in the technical fields that are positioned at those offices.
Can yoy propose an artistic lawyer????
I agree that for the some people, remote work can be a great improvement in efficiency but the problem is that that is not universally the case.
The problem is that despite the remote work, patents have become increasingly expensive while the time to approve the has also increased and this is hurting business.
I support remote work but the government needs to become more efficient and at least with in-person work, that efficiency can be monitored and improved.
Our team works remote and we meeting our project targets. I suspect if we start falling behind, there will be a call for "all hands on deck" and we will all be in the office.
If you (or anyone else) has an alternate proposal to reduce wait time without increasing costs, I am all ears. Currently China is completing patent reviews in 14-16mo and issued 1.6 million utility patents in 2024. On the other hand, the US takes 36mo and only released 300,000 patents in 2024. That is ridiculous and embarrassing.
Thank you for your excellent, well-thought out comment! I agree with everything you wrote. My understanding and observation of the work that is performed by Examiners is that it does not involve working in teams at all. Therefore, in-person collaboration is not necessary. Examiners work independently and did so even when they were in the office everyday. The contrast between the overall, high level performance of the U.S. patent office examination system in comparison to those of other countries, I believe could be attributed to the lack of value that our country places in our Examiners. For example, German, Chinese, and Japanese examiners are VERY highly respected and are compensated accordingly. Engineers and scientists from those countries respect and value working at those patent offices. In contrast, the U.S. does not compensate the Examiners at the same level as other countries, let alone the rest of the U.S. job market, therefore, people only go to the patent office if they cannot find a better job and see it as a last resort. If we want efficient, fast, high quality examination, we need to attract better talent to the patent office.
Patent law certainly needs to be revisited.
Forcing everyone back into offices will waste more money on office rent and setup, and waste employees’ time and morale on commute travel. Big hit against tax dollar efficiency.
I agree completely. Thank you for your comment!
Working from home has become a joke period.
Federal buildings sitting vacant while taxpayers are paying for utilities. Let's cut the fat first .
When musk says all politicians to stop using and colluding with corperate lobbyist, call me when he does that .
One hour each way is normal in most cities talking from London UK
Ending remote work wouldn't make any significant difference at all over the long run and would actually hurt more than help over the short run. I think it's a waste of time and DOGE should focus their efforts elsewhere.
Does Musk have better ideas, or is it just a power grab? There is certainly room for improvement.
Very good question! Only history will tell. Thank you for your comment!
The real problem with Patents is it limits creation, if someone creates a product, do it well and make if affordable for others and this will create demand. I have been involved in the process and I gave up because it was too expensive and there are so many variations you may not be able to create your product even if it exceeds other products by a long shot. You said it its profit and has nothing to do with creation and the betterment of mankind. Sounds like more corporate gobble goop and lets look at a lot of the very poor products produced that are so damn expensive and last half of what they used to. Automobiles would fit that example. How about instead of profits we focus on delivery of sustainable products that do not fill up dump sites and really get what we pay for.
Agree with you completely. It should not all be about profit. Thank you for your excellent comment!
"gov't efficiency" means AI. AI means central control, less gov't vulnerability to pesky humans who have morals and interest in truth and justice.
Many jobs do well with home working. So, why not the patent office.
I have a few patents on the American system and I'm thousands of miles from them, so, many people will simply not care where they're located. Musk has a habit of annoying some people and I suspect that he may soon start annoying Trump and that may End Musk's interference.
Very insightful! And congratulations on your patents! Personally, I really appreciate being able to work from home, however, I will say that it is nice to occasionally interact with my colleagues in person. Frankly, I think many of us are MORE productive working from home or from wherever we choose to work to be the most productive.
You sound very Naive.. please do your research before peddling these rosey pictures about these two con-artists.
@@rusty-y8r who are "these two con artists"? I heard only plain reporting of fact about what one (non elected) individual says he'd like to do with the patent office. Who was the other individual?
By rosey, did you mean the adjective rosy?
It's worthwhile listening to what's actually being said and applying some critical thinking to those words before challenging people about doing research. Where Musk is concerned, people haven't far to go to find out what he's been saying. X is right there to get it from the horse's mouth and because he is so prominent, he is being reported on throughout the day and at night sometimes. Musk needs little researching for this level of opinion piece, and that's what it is, an opinion, nothing more, nothing less.
I'd have thought anyone with an interest in intellectual property would want to know if a character like Musk was going to poke his nose in, as that could end up detrimental towards anyone trying to protect their IP. If Musk gets involved, I'd be more concerned about him trying to profit from that involvement and we don't need that.