It seems that some of the PTO examiners are not thrilled about the PTO's recent move to allow EPO to test doing some PCT searches for US applications. Excerpts from: Patent Office Professional Association Newsletter, Vol. 94, no. 5, November 1994, pages 1-2: SOME PCT SEARCHES WILL NO LONGER BE "MADE IN THE USA" Association representatives long have speculated about a management assault on the patent examining job via contracting out of functions. Now we learn for the first time in an Official Gazette Notice dated October 18, 1994 that searches in selected international applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty will be farmed out to the European Patent Office. No prior notice had been given to the Association or the examining corps. The October 18, 1994 OG Notice from Lawrence J. Goffney, Jr., Assistant Commissioner for Patents reads as follows: In an experiment to permit the Patent and Trademark Office to more effectively address the growing workload of international searches in international applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, and to take advantage of the current workload shortage at the European Patent Office (EPO), searches in selected international applications will be conducted by EPO examiners in the Hague. Applications will be selected from among those applications that do not claim priority of an earlier application, that do not select the EPO as the International Searching Authority, and contain a designation for a European Patent. The Search Report in these selected applications will be signed by the examiner in the PTO, and mailed from the PTO. Although the international search fee charged by the EPO is higher than that charged by the PTO, applicants will continue to pay the international search fee charged by the PTO in these selected applications. Accordingly, fees paid to the PTO will not be affected during this experiment. We wonder if the EPO is going to be compensated at the normal European rate or at the much lower U.S. rate? If the U.S. is going to compensate the EPO at the higher European rate, we wonder why A/C Goffney is willing to spend more on a European search than he is willing to spend here in the U.S.A. On the other hand, if the Europeans are willing to accept the much lower U.S. rate, we wonder how much time and effort will be put into such a cut rate search. The only thing more scary is that Assistant Commissioner Goffney is asking you, the U.S. examiner, to put your name to that search. Why is the PTO resorting to such deception? Some of us can still remember when "MADE IN THE U.S.A." meant something. As if this experiment wasn't bad enough, the way in which it was developed undercuts the entire partnership effort that Commissioner Lehman has tried to foster. One of the main components of the Clinton Administration's concept of partnership is up front notification to the employees' representative (POPA) of proposed changes in the workplace. The desired result here is that if the employees' representative is notified in advance and allowed to voice its concerns and suggestions then a great deal of litigation and hostility toward such changes can be avoided - producing savings for the federal government (and savings for your Association). What we see here is the old way of participating in labor relations. Management keeps the employees and their representatives in the dark about proposed changes in the workplace and then springs it on them publicly with no opportunity for comment or input, thus challenging the employees to litigate over the change and its implementation. It seems that the PTO made the INTERNET on this OG Notice. Greg Aharonian writing for the Internet Patent News Service is aghast over management's new experiment. He stated "You know, it is bad enough that U.S. corporations are shipping jobs overseas, but does the U.S. government have to engage in the same practices?" ==================== To be honest, I was more sarcastic than aghast - it is hard being aghast about anything the US government does. I wonder what else examiners are unhappy about that appears in the POPA newsletter. This does affect the public's ability to apply for patents. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service (for subscription info, send 'help' to patents@world.std.com ) (for prior art search services info, send 'prior' to patents@world.std.com ) (for WWW patent searching, try http://sunsite.unc.edu/patents/intropat.html )