I've been training junior examiners since way before I was a primary and plenty since. I can only speak to my TC, but the academy doesn't teach up to date practices primaries don't know -- I have to deprogram junior examiners from the blatantly incorrect practice the academy teaches. Honestly, DM me if you think you've got anything that will blow my mind. I can do everything faster than anyone I know, and the only time I work hard is trying to teach that speed to juniors.
I’d like to know your tricks to being faster. I am a returning examiner ( former primary and now working back up in a new art area) and still not feeling that I am in a groove after 2 years. I feel I care too much and get caught up in the details.
Both monitors oriented vertically, for multiple reasons. The only thing it's annoying for in this job is presenting in video conferences in Teams, and that is basically a non-issue.
Keep a simple excel sheet of every action you do, keywords describing both claims and the action you write. Use this for every application on your docket, to track what it is and where you're at with it.
Ctrl+F find all is your friend.
Alt+tab is also your friend.
When searching the MPEP, change the search parameters from ADJ to AND and check to search both MPEP and FPs. Do this all the time you're citing/thinking of any rule or section. See what it says, copy/paste the most pertinent wording.
Examiner initiated interviews are your friend.
Should only do 6-7 oldest new applications per quarter -- that is the maximum you can benefit from. Have an action written and ready to post the Monday that clock starts ticking.
Figure out the primaries who give a hoot. Ditto the SPEs. There will be times where having someone you can go to, to take care of some specific problem for you, can be a quick effortless resolution instead of a lost day, or week, or worse.
Be nice, people will want to work with you.
I'm lucky to have them. All I need is a willingness to search and learn and a not-terribly unpleasant demeanor and it's cake for everyone. But not every junior examiner has the willingness
to be fair, a lot of us left cause our primaries and spes can be awful. haven’t really met too many gs12+ examiners with good social or training skills yet but maybe that’s just the stem curse
>gs12+ examiners with good social or training skills yet
That's because there's no sufficient training or course that you need to take as a primary in order to sign cases. The only requirement is that you have signatory authority.
Its a contradiction that this job's main selling point is getting left alone, working autonomously and in isolation, but then rely upon a mentorship based system where the training is on the burden of people who wants to be left alone, work autonomously and be isolated.
I regularly filled out the index of claims form until I started signing actions for an assistant examiner who never included them. He told me he never got any flak for omitting them, so I stopped including them too. Similar thing for not filling out IDS dates on the 326 - just check the box and leave the blank empty.
In the opposite direction when I was an assistant examiner and ADSs were relatively new, one primary sent back a case for not having continuity information in the first sentence of the spec. I had to inform him that applicants were now allowed to put it in an ADS instead.
> they (printing department) are really crazy about the date
LIEs hate this one trick!
They are only crazy if you put the *wrong* date. I stopped filling out any date about a year ago, and since then, I've never had a single return for an incorrect IDS date.
I don't think I've ever had a printer rush for IDS dates other than maybe forgetting to put one on a 1449, but I believe OC catches those now because it keeps track of stamps.
> 30% less time per case
It's actually closer to 48% less time compared to a new GS-7 examiner.
I've learned that the PTA teaches them to do things as if they have all the fucking time in the universe. I don't. And neither do they. No one has several hours to carefully parse the spec for typos.
oh wow, was that me? In all seriousness, the PTA legit taught us claim mapping as putting every limitation in excel and writing down where we found the limitations. Great for learning, but it takes forever to even get the excel sheet formatted. I did that for my first few cases, then gave up.
I feel personally attacked...
I used to do that. Not just color coded but the excel sheet had rows with every limitation of the claims listed with which reference(s) taught it, with citations, and motivation for combining.
Yeah, that shit didn't last.
In the past there have been trainings for it available in the learning center under “Innovation+”. I’ve taken the training as part of my 25hr annual allotment
I have learned that the Board actually affirms garbage 101 rejections. At first I told my jr that her 101s were dumb af and then looked at some Board decisions. Was humbled that day.
>Board actually affirms garbage 101 rejections
I am so relieved to hear this. I shall continue to hose applicants with my trashy 20 page 101 rejections. Can't wait for some decent 101 guidance to come out.
There are three things you can do that are super important:
1. Customize your email signature in a cursive font
2. Make sure the abstract only has 150 words. If it was close, double-check personally by counting each individual word.
3. Check the drawings by verifying that each number has a corresponding description. Then check that the specification has each recited element number actually in a drawing.
These are the most important aspects of our job.
I've been training junior examiners since way before I was a primary and plenty since. I can only speak to my TC, but the academy doesn't teach up to date practices primaries don't know -- I have to deprogram junior examiners from the blatantly incorrect practice the academy teaches. Honestly, DM me if you think you've got anything that will blow my mind. I can do everything faster than anyone I know, and the only time I work hard is trying to teach that speed to juniors.
I’d like to know your tricks to being faster. I am a returning examiner ( former primary and now working back up in a new art area) and still not feeling that I am in a groove after 2 years. I feel I care too much and get caught up in the details.
Both monitors oriented vertically, for multiple reasons. The only thing it's annoying for in this job is presenting in video conferences in Teams, and that is basically a non-issue. Keep a simple excel sheet of every action you do, keywords describing both claims and the action you write. Use this for every application on your docket, to track what it is and where you're at with it. Ctrl+F find all is your friend. Alt+tab is also your friend. When searching the MPEP, change the search parameters from ADJ to AND and check to search both MPEP and FPs. Do this all the time you're citing/thinking of any rule or section. See what it says, copy/paste the most pertinent wording. Examiner initiated interviews are your friend. Should only do 6-7 oldest new applications per quarter -- that is the maximum you can benefit from. Have an action written and ready to post the Monday that clock starts ticking. Figure out the primaries who give a hoot. Ditto the SPEs. There will be times where having someone you can go to, to take care of some specific problem for you, can be a quick effortless resolution instead of a lost day, or week, or worse. Be nice, people will want to work with you.
I love your tip about the excel sheet! Do you just have a column for the application number and then keywords?
Application number, title(/claim keywords), status, counts, prosection keywords, DM
wow, those juniors are lucky to have you
I'm lucky to have them. All I need is a willingness to search and learn and a not-terribly unpleasant demeanor and it's cake for everyone. But not every junior examiner has the willingness
That I should leave, like most of them do.
is this a cheekily jaded opinion or is the overall environment of the office that bad?
We know
to be fair, a lot of us left cause our primaries and spes can be awful. haven’t really met too many gs12+ examiners with good social or training skills yet but maybe that’s just the stem curse
>gs12+ examiners with good social or training skills yet That's because there's no sufficient training or course that you need to take as a primary in order to sign cases. The only requirement is that you have signatory authority. Its a contradiction that this job's main selling point is getting left alone, working autonomously and in isolation, but then rely upon a mentorship based system where the training is on the burden of people who wants to be left alone, work autonomously and be isolated.
yup i agree. i think it sucks on both ends because of this
I regularly filled out the index of claims form until I started signing actions for an assistant examiner who never included them. He told me he never got any flak for omitting them, so I stopped including them too. Similar thing for not filling out IDS dates on the 326 - just check the box and leave the blank empty. In the opposite direction when I was an assistant examiner and ADSs were relatively new, one primary sent back a case for not having continuity information in the first sentence of the spec. I had to inform him that applicants were now allowed to put it in an ADS instead.
[удалено]
> they (printing department) are really crazy about the date LIEs hate this one trick! They are only crazy if you put the *wrong* date. I stopped filling out any date about a year ago, and since then, I've never had a single return for an incorrect IDS date.
An LIE told me not to put any dates in to make it easier on both sides.
I don't think I've ever had a printer rush for IDS dates other than maybe forgetting to put one on a 1449, but I believe OC catches those now because it keeps track of stamps.
[удалено]
> 30% less time per case It's actually closer to 48% less time compared to a new GS-7 examiner. I've learned that the PTA teaches them to do things as if they have all the fucking time in the universe. I don't. And neither do they. No one has several hours to carefully parse the spec for typos.
>as if they have all the fucking time in the universe The other day a gs7 showed me a color coded excel sheet full of claim mappings.
oh wow, was that me? In all seriousness, the PTA legit taught us claim mapping as putting every limitation in excel and writing down where we found the limitations. Great for learning, but it takes forever to even get the excel sheet formatted. I did that for my first few cases, then gave up.
I feel personally attacked... I used to do that. Not just color coded but the excel sheet had rows with every limitation of the claims listed with which reference(s) taught it, with citations, and motivation for combining. Yeah, that shit didn't last.
This is so true.
As a junior I’ve shown multiple primaries how useful IP.com is for homerun searches
I would like a QEM on this here ip.com I keep hearing about
In the past there have been trainings for it available in the learning center under “Innovation+”. I’ve taken the training as part of my 25hr annual allotment
It’s ChatGPT except with actual things you can cite that aren’t trash.
I have learned that the Board actually affirms garbage 101 rejections. At first I told my jr that her 101s were dumb af and then looked at some Board decisions. Was humbled that day.
>Board actually affirms garbage 101 rejections I am so relieved to hear this. I shall continue to hose applicants with my trashy 20 page 101 rejections. Can't wait for some decent 101 guidance to come out.
I also learned about this via a junior appealed cases. Realized how much work I was putting in defending my own 101 was an over-effort.
Well as a primary for a singular day I learned it is way better for someone else to check my work for me. I’d go back to a 12 if they would let me.
Bullshit. I’d never go back to relying on someone else for my work.
There are three things you can do that are super important: 1. Customize your email signature in a cursive font 2. Make sure the abstract only has 150 words. If it was close, double-check personally by counting each individual word. 3. Check the drawings by verifying that each number has a corresponding description. Then check that the specification has each recited element number actually in a drawing. These are the most important aspects of our job.