USPTO Sued Over "Unqualified Appointment"

Techdirt is reporting that a small group of patent lawyers and investors are suing the US Secretary of Commerce in order to prevent the appointment of Margaret Peterlin to Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the US Patent and Trademark Office. "According to the suit, filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Congress amended the Patent Act in 1999 to require that the Director and Deputy Director of the USPTO each have "professional experience and background in patent or trademark law." Peterlin's appointment, announced May 8, violates the statute because she "lacks the requisite professional experience and background," the suit said. [...] They are asking the court to order Gutierrez to dismiss Peterlin immediately and establish rules to assess what qualifies as a professional background and experience in patent or trademark law. They also want the court to order Gutierrez to appoint a replacement for Peterlin who fulfills those requirements."

Comments

no standing

[delong]

Sue today, gone tomorrow. The plaintiffs sure as hell don't seem to have standing to sue. This is a "generalized grievance" that will get kicked out of court if ever I saw one. No injury, no redressability, nada.

Re:no standing

[SatanicPuppy]

How do you figure? If the law states that candidates must have "professional experience and background in patent or trademark law" and the candidate lacks these (as she does), then they have grounds to open a civil action and attempt to prove it in court. This is right up with the EPA getting sued for not regulating carbon emissions

And the obvious redress would be to kick the unqualified candidate and replace her with a qualified candidate...One whose credentials include more than being J. Dennis Hastert's Counsel for Legal Policy.

Re:no standing

[ClamIAm]

opening [their idea] to the entire world to steal

Thomas Jefferson trumps you:

If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Source

Re:no standing

[djasbestos]

Nobody said they were suing for damages...a suit (especially in government) can merely end up in the court ordering something to be done. So, it may not be illegal to *not* enforce the law, but it *IS* illegal to disobey a court order.

Re:no standing

[Attila Dimedici]

Oh yeah, BTW, I was shitting in a system that was designed to filter the shit so it didn't enter the water supply since before the Clean Water Act was passed. The house I grew up in had a septic system that was installed when the plumbing was retrofitted to it (the house was built before indoor plumbing was in use in most of the U.S.). The septic system was periodically updated as technology improved. However, the purpose of the septic system from day one was to prevent the shit from getting into the water supply. When did people first start suggesting that CO2 was a pollutant?

Establish rules to assess what qualifies

[Anonymous Coward]

So they are saying that someone doesn't qualify despite the fact that there are no rules as to what qualifies?

She's hardly the only one...

[going_the_2Rpi_way]

Given their apparent difficulty in finding 'prior art' for a wide variety of patents, it seems the USPTO is probably full of "Unqualified Apoint[ees]".

Re:hmm

[Synic]

Wouldn't this invite more Cheney type behavior where a person representing a company like Microsoft for many years in patent litigation can become USPTO chief and then allow them to get patents on whatever they want?

Re:Huh?

[fyngyrz]

Seriously, it would be a hell of a good thing if, in order to serve as a congress-critter or a US senator, you had to pass a detailed test on the content of the constitution. Much of our political system is staffed by people who have no idea what is constitutional and what is not.

Hence our broad complement of unconstitutional federal activities - ex post facto laws, federal restrictions on keeping and bearing arms, taking of property for non-public use, abridgment of speech, commerce clause inversion, non-enumerated power grabs, failure to provide access to representation, failure to provide speedy trial, warrentless searches and seizures, government support of particular religious outlooks, etc.

It'll never happen, though. We even let these buffoons set their own salaries; we've entirely forfeited control of a federal government that was supposed to serve us.

Patriot citizen boxes: ballot, soap, jury, ammo, cell, coffin.
Typical citizen boxes: Television.
Political repr. boxes: Soap, PAC, junket, pocket, rider.

Re:Hot Air

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it is about politics. No it is not about "this person has an 'R' after their name". The real issue is competence and honesty. Bush appoints incompetent and extremely partisan political scum, who proceed to destroy whatever they control. You want examples? How about the Iraq and the Coalition Provisional Authority: they recruited heavily from inexperienced people who served on the Bush campaign. Half the people who went over to build Iraq after the fall of Baghdad NEVER HAD A PASSPORT, they all had to apply. What about the joke they call FEMA? Except we shouldn't be laughing, we should be crying. Or FERC (E for ENERGY), who consistently voted in favor of letting the corporations that stole from California during the Enron created fake energy crises keep their illegal profits. It was only when the court cases came to trial years later that they had to give back the money. And even so FERC said that they could keep the contracts that were made under manipulated market conditions. And Gonzales at DOJ? He's done the equivalent of putting the KKK in charge of voting rights. And the list goes on and on.

Why are they suing? Because it's gotten so bad that the only way to get competent people running our governmental is to sue.

Re:Huh?

[Nimey]

Much of our political system is staffed by people who have no idea what is constitutional and what is not.

More like they simply don't give a shit. And why should they? We're not holding them accountable.

Re:Hot Air

[starfishsystems]

She's totally qualified given her background.

She has a generally strong political background but appears to be qualified in no particular whatsoever. That's a far cry from being "totally" qualified.

Totally qualified would mean qualified in all respects, not just maybe a vague hand wave because she knows how to work the political machine.

That appears to be the essential problem. People somehow have developed the hubris that any sufficiently talented generalist can master a new field in short order and lead it to success. Not so. A senior position in any field requires someone who knows the field. And at our present level of complexity, that degree of mastery takes a lifetime.

You can settle for less in the name of political expediency, but don't fool yourself that it's just as good an appointment as someone who actually knew the field well. A totally qualified candidate would know the field and be able to get along with the political establishment. You're getting half a slice of pie.

Re:Hot Air

[gowen]

People somehow have developed the hubris that any sufficiently talented generalist can master a new field in short order and lead it to success.

What, you mean running a society for horse enthusiasts doesn't qualify you to run the Federal Governments disaster relief agency? I'm shocked.