Re: patent on computer screen advertising

In Message Sat, 23 Apr 1994 05:27:12 -0400,   Terry Carroll <TCARROLL[_at_]SCUACC.SCU.EDU> writes:
>
>I'm currently enrolled in a Patent Offices Practice course in law
>school, and showed the claim to my professor (Ed Taylor, of Blakely
>Sokoloff Taylor & Zafman). He termed it "criminal."
>
>A classmate remarked that a few years ago, there was an incident of a
>particular patent examiner who was leaving the Office, and who was
>essentially rubber-stamping nearly any application in order to get
>his brownie points prior to his departure. (This may be apocryphal
>for all we know, he conceded.) If this is true, I wonder if this is
>that examiner?

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The real problem is the setup of the PTO. Examiners do not have adequate time to examine complex applications. They also lack adequate resources to do adequate searches. Additionally, a well-financed patent attorney is no match for the meager resources of the examiner. Using affidavits under section 132 of the patent rules (i.e. Section 132 practice), coupled with examiner interviews (to which you bring the inventor and several PHD's), it is difficult for the examiner not to be persuaded to allow claims that should not be allowed.

--
Andrew Beckerman-Rodau          Phone:       419-772-2207
Professor of Law                FAX:         419-772-1875
Ohio Northern University        INTERNET:    arodau[_at_]crassus.onu.edu
Pettit College of Law           Home Office: arodau[_at_]aol.com
Ada, OH 45810