USPTO Tried To Hide Abuse And Fraud By Patent Examiners From Inspector General
from the part-II dept
So, we just wrote about the fact that there was apparently fairly widespread abuse and fraud by patent examiners, mostly those working from home, in lying about the hours they put in and getting paid for work they didn't do. However, what may be much more concerning was the fact that the USPTO tried to hide this from the Inspector General who was investigating this. As the Washington Post notes, an initial internal report detailed many more examples of fraud and abuse, which disappeared from the final report that was handed over.But when it came time last summer for the patent office to turn over the findings to its outside watchdog, the most damaging revelations had disappeared. The report sent to Commerce Department Inspector General Todd Zinser concluded that it was impossible to know if the whistleblowers’ allegations of systemic abuses were true.The white washing of the abuse seems particularly problematic, given that it paints a very different picture, where the problems aren't so pervasive, and that the problems don't go back to leadership (hmm...).
“What we hoped to see was an unfiltered response,” Zinser said.“That’s not what this was. It’s a lot less sensational. The true extent of the problem was not being conveyed to us.”
The original findings, by contrast, raise “fundamental issues” with the business model of the patent office, which oversees an essential function of U.S. commerce, said Zinser, who was provided a copy of the original by a patent official.
Both reports conclude that policies negotiated with the patent examiners’ union have left managers with few tools to monitor their staffs. Both acknowledge that supervisors have limited access to records that could prove suspected time fraud, resulting in negligible disciplinary action.The USPTO is trying to frame this distinction as being that the first report was a "rough draft" and the latter was a more complete version, but it seems like the opposite. The first was pretty complete, and the second is... missing a bunch.
But the original one describes a culture of fraud that is overlooked by senior leaders, lax enforcement of the rules and the resulting frustration of many front-line supervisors. The version provided to the watchdog was far less conclusive, saying that managers who were interviewed held “inconsistent” views on whether examiners were gaming the system.
The fact that the USPTO tried to hide this abuse -- and the fact that it appears to be systemic -- also suggestions an operation that is not looking to fix the problems, but to brush them under the rug. It certainly does not inspire much confidence.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: abuse, fraud, inspector general, uspto, whitewashing
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What the...?
The GAO doesn't have enough power, local police have run amok, and the IP offices are all over the place.
So... Who's really in charge here? These bureaucracies are not doing well internally and you'd have to be crazy not to notice all the turmoil as it comes to light.
The leaders are running scared, there's no motivation at the bottom and the list of problems just go on and on...
At this point, the systems are truly broken. It's just awe inspiring how a government refuses to acknowledge and correct mistakes but deluded itself about how solvent it is while it hurts itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What the...?
Lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Few tools to monitor their staffs?
Time fraud on the part of employees?
If employees will cheat their employer, what are the odds that they don't care about the larger consequences?
And here we are in the second decade of the 21st century with patent trolls and patent lawsuits run amok.
What are the odds that these cheating (and maybe non cheating) employees have granted large numbers of patents that should have been laughed out of the patent office faster than you can say "slide to unlock"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
I liked manglers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
I believe this to be true. I believe that most patent examiners honestly want to grant the good patents and reject the bad. But a key part of what you said is "meet the legal requirements". I think those legal requirements are what's broken. I also believe that patent examiners are not given sufficient time and resources to do an excellent job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Few tools to monitor their staffs?
You had it right the first time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guess they should hire Managers that can actually do their jobs , this sounds like a finger pointing issue and the blame game. The buck stops here. Blaming the employees is a pretty pitiful excuse for not doing ones job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The basic premise of a manager is that you need someone to manage your employees because you don't trust them to do their work properly otherwise. And if you also hire incompetent managers you are SOL.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not shocked
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Back to square one, do not pass go
Fundamental issue #1: The USPTO has a business model. It does?
And oh yeah, somebodies NEED TO BE FIRED.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessica Patterson?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jail Time
They work for US(you and me), not the Govt Leviathan that is destroying the country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: would like to talk to you more...
I tend to like your posts and believe your one of the good guys...
if you get this send me a reply and we will go from there.
thanks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rounded corners anyone?
The list of bogus software patents goes on and on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(posted from work, I must be a terrorist)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These steps taken to pretend to be working for the patent office while actually doing little work and still getting paid.
1) Acquire position in the patent office as a patent examiner (usually found as a prize in a snack box or this position can be purchased at your local government building)
2) Apply to work from home as a patent examiner. If you include in your application to work from home that you "really really" entend to do a good job, it will usually get approved because we have too many examiners and too little space anyway.
3) Open patent office laptop at 8 AM
4) Go eat breakfast
5) Once done with breakfast, reply to any email you have received recently that your boss is on the TO or CC list
6) Review your patent queue for any computer related patents that look complicated - approve these patent applications so it looks like you are getting something done, nobody will understand them except the lawyers anyway
7) Surf the internet for awhile
8) Between 11 AM and 12 PM, reply to another email similar to the one above
9) Go to lunch
10) Watch Judge Judy for awhile
11) Review your patent queue for any computer related patents that look simple - reject them so it looks like you are getting something done
12) Between 3 PM and 4 PM, reply to another email similar to the ones above
13) Submit your timesheet for the day
Repeat steps 3 through 13 daily. These steps can be completed from anywhere with an internet connection, so feel free to work from your local pub a few times a week as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prior art
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Public unions should be illegal
The first principle of republicanism, as stated by Alexander Hamilton at the New York constitutional debates, is that the people shall choose who is to represent them. In other words, we have to be able to "throw the bums out," but unionized workers cannot be thrown out. Their union status grants them privleges vis a vis their employer, the American People, and that is fundamentally unrepublican, and in fact is a violation of the Constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Folks the wheel is not broken. If examiners do nothing for two weeks have they done any work? Yes when in the previous two weeks they completed twice the amount of cases and are now coasting. And yes, retroactively, if they complete additional cases before the end of the quarter.
The patent office wants consistent production every biweek but the report goes beyond that. It says examiners must have continuous "work" not only every two weeks, not only every day, but down to the hour. So according to the report if an examiner spends 5 hours to finish a case that the PTO allots 10 hours, they are stealing from the government when finishing early and doing nothing else. That's a ridiculous narrow definition of "work".
Put it this way, can an air traffic controller "work" 75% of the time while in the control tower? No, that would be chaotic and dangerous and a breach of their duty. But an examiner can hand in 75% of her production over two weeks and still be ok as long as by the end of the quarter the overall production is met. That happens all the time and 75% production is considered the de facto minimum acceptable biweekly production to earn the biweekly paycheck there.
Examiners' paychecks remain relatively constant while hourly/daily/weekly work output varies over three months. Examiners are obligated to do X amount of work in three months. That's the definition of "work" as defined by the PTO and how ratings are given. There's no good way to change that. Their production system has been tweaked occasionally for over two decades so maybe there are a few more tweaks left to do. The most important thing is to get examiners to produce, not nitpick what they are doing at any given hour.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Petition the USPTO to use software to monitor abuse
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
by that logic the IRS would have the budget currently assigned to the armed forces.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A "performance" based position, NOT "by the hour"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]