Slashdot Mirror
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."
If this ploy works, I suggest bringing a class action suit against the Presidency on the same grounds.
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.
So they are saying that someone doesn't qualify despite the fact that there are no rules as to what qualifies?
She's a member of the Federalist Society, isn't that enough? http://www.fed-soc.org/publications/id.54/author.a sp
What more could you want?
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]".
=======
Science -- Sealed, Delivered.
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.
It would have been so much easier if Congress had just made the law say "must have been a registered U.S. patent attorney for at least 5 years before appointment."
WTF? Someone, who is otherwise unqualified, is getting a political appointment? What's going on here?
This is outrageous - does President Bush know about this? Probably not. I'm sure if he did he'd do something about it - that's his no-nonsense way.
Before joining the USPTO, Peterlin was Counsel for Legal Policy and National Security Advisor for the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, according to biographical information on the USPTO's Web site. In this role, she advised Hastert, House and Senate leadership, and senior staff on legislative policy and strategy, including judiciary issues such as intellectual property protection, the Web site said.
Peterlin also served as general counsel to Richard Armey, majority leader of the House of Representatives, the Web site said. She clerked on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for Judge Jerry Smith and also served as an officer in the U.S. Navy for four years, working in the communications field, the Web site said. She holds a bachelor of arts degree from the College of the Holy Cross and earned a law degree cum laude from the University of Chicago, the Web site said.
At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist here, why are they doing this?
Lawsuits are soul sucking, time consuming, and really really expensive. I could see how some legal body or activist group may be interested for idealistic reasons, but investors?
If they are putting the big dollars in they will be wanting the big dollars out again. That's what investors do. The question is why and how. What has either this law or woman woman done or not done to engender this kind of hostility?
curiouser and curioser
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.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
More like they simply don't give a shit. And why should they? We're not holding them accountable.
Hail Eris, full of mischief...
E pluribus sanguinem
From the plaintiff's letter to the judge: While we appreciate Ms. Peterlin's accomplishments, we are nonetheless surprised that her biography does not include any apparent references to professional activity concerning patents or trademarks, in either a practical, corporate, academic, or publishing capacity. http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/06/letter-questions -credentials-of.html
Also, given the Cheney/Bush regime's attempts to politicize all levels of our government, usually at the expense of competency, *every one* of their appointments should be viewed with extreme jaundice. See Gonzalez, Alberto, amongst many others.
Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813
Here's a link to the complete transcript of the letter. The University of Chicago only published about 1/7 of it.
For those who cannot understand the relevance, Jefferson was a Founder of America and Third President. This is a primary document regarding the original intent of patents. Original intent is considered to be the gold standard by many conservatives. In this letter, Jefferson even covers the concept of 'prior art', as well as makes an assertion that ideas are without the realm of private ownership.
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
We don't hold them accountable because that would be unconstitutional. :-)
For good reason too -- fear of repercussions from the executive and judicial branches must not be allowed to cripple congress. Imagine what would have happened if certain presidents or had the power to fire or imprison congressmen for "misconduct".
Yes, there's a bad side to the immunity, but that's a small price to pay for the representatives being able to speak and vote freely.