The watchdog’s conclusion is contained in a report drawn up by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), which was released on Thursday. The study, entitled “US Patent and Trademark Office: Hiring Efforts are Not Sufficient to Reduce the Patent Backlog,” looks at the Office’s hiring efforts over the past five years.
The report says that although the USPTO is hiring as many new patent examiners as its budget and institutional capacity will support, attrition is offsetting the hiring progress.
“From 2002 through 2006, one patent examiner left USPTO for nearly every two the agency hired,” it says.
The GAO’s conclusions about the reasons for the high level of patent examiner turnover at the Office contradict the USPTO’s own assertion that most examiners leave due to personal and family reasons.
The report says that 67% of the 1,129 examiners who responded to its web-based survey claimed that antiquated production goals were to blame for them quitting the Office.
“These production goals are based on the number of applications patent examiners must complete biweekly and have not been adjusted to reflect the complexity of patent applications since 1976,” the report says.
It also reveals that 70% of patent examiners told the GAO that they had worked unpaid overtime during the past year, in order to meet their production goals.
The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Commerce ask USPTO chief Jon Dudas to undertake a “comprehensive evaluation of the assumptions that the agency uses to establish patent examiner production goals and revise those assumptions as appropriate”.
In response, Jon Dudas said in a statement: “I am pleased that, after careful study, the GAO agrees with our assessment that hiring alone will not reduce the backlog of patent application ... We believe that our 5-year strategic plan identifies initiatives that effectively protect innovation while promoting a quality workplace that attracts and retains employees. That is why many of our most current initiatives incentivize applicants and the public to provide the best information to patent examiners early in the examination process.”
He also promises that the USPTO “will review assumptions the agency uses to establish production goals for patent examiners”.
But Robert Budens, president of the Patent Office Professional Association (POPA), which represents many patent examiners at the USPTO, is skeptical. “Historically, management has not been willing to reevaluate our goals,” he told MIP Week. “Basically, I’ll believe it when I see it.”
Budens also questions assertions made by David Sampson, deputy Secretary of Commerce in a letter commenting on a draft version of the GAO’s report.
In his letter, which appears on page 37 of the final report, Sampson says: “In general, the USPTO agrees with GAO’s assessment of the challenges facing it and GAO’s conclusion that hiring efforts alone are not sufficient to reduce the patent application backlog.”
He refers to several of the USPTO’s pending rule changes and states that “it is anticipated that there will be efficiencies gained from these initiatives.”
“That is serious government doublespeak,” said Budens. “They’re looking for ways to take time away from the examiners [in lieu of reforming] examination time allocation and production goals”.
“The agency says that it can’t hire its way out of the backlog to justify many of its ill-conceived reforms. But it would in fact be able to cut the backlog if it could keep the employees it hires, and the GAO’s study shows that the Patent Office can do that by giving examiners the time and tools they need,” Budens said.
The November issue of Managing IP will carry a full-length feature about the criticism that the USPTO faces, and how it is responding.
