if you have sufficent training you can stop in a much shorter distance without ABS, its a concept called threshold braking. basically you have to learn where the lockup point is on the brakes, if oyu know where this is, and you don't cross that line, you can brake in the shortest distance possible without the ABS kicking in, or having to pulse the brakes yourself so you don't induce a slide.
unfortunatly, its something you really can't practice on the street. abs is great for the average driver, but it is a hinderance to me in the snow and at the track/autox.
yet oddly enough most ESP, DSC type systems reign you in way to early. a trained track drive can still get closer to the edge than most of these systems allow.
i track and autox my cars, these safety "aides" get turned off because they hinder the performance, and don't allow one to learn properly. same deal as antilock brakes, they stop further than threshold braking.
they are great for the average non enthusiast driver who just wants to go somewhere but doesnt care about getting better. As long as I can still disable them, I have no problem with these features being implemented on cars. Just some recent models you can't turn them all off, for example the new lexus is350!
Yep, thats why I pointed out what attracts people here, asides from people who want some government experience prior to going to law school to persue a career in IP law.
AF responses are supposed to be mailed back out within 30 days of receipt, so you really only have about 10 days to work on them.
I won't comment on the work environment or retention issues, but will say, like just about every other job, people would like a longer deadline. There are remedies being discussed, such as limiting IDS's to the references which are pertinant, and reducing the number of claims, but additonal examiners will certainly help.
The PTO recieves quite a few job applications a year. It is a very desireable place to work at due to its benefits, pay and flexible work schedule (if on maxiflex shceudle you can work 80 hours every biweek pretty much any way you want). The vast majority of people do not start as a GS-5 step one. Having a decent GPA, at least a year of work experience, a masters degree and the like result in starting as a gs-5 step 10 or a gs-7-11. Your first promotion is available in 6 months, subsequent promotions are available 1 year from that date. In 4-5 years you make nearly 100k if you start as a gs 5 or 7. There are plenty of bonus's available, and you can work paid overtime and comp time.
The PTO hase absolutely no problems hiring people at all. In fact next year they are looking to hire about 800-1000 people. The main problem is retention.
ah the elusive first action allowance, I think ive had 1 of those in 4 years on a totally new case, though they are nice after RCE.
Yeah it pretty much works the same way, however, most applicants seem to fail to read all of the references of record when I apply them the next time around. Maybe they figure I will forget why I cited the references as pertinant art?
Promotions in the PTO are rapid, you can be a gs-13 or gs-14 in just 4-5 years ($80-95k), where as in other portions of the government it takes an entire career.
Actually, we have no incentive to approve a patent at all. Examiners also recieve a count for abandonment and for requests for continued examination (abandonment by the applicant which starts the clock all over). You just have to wait 6 months from the date of your final rejection.
If anything it is in the examiners best interest to issue a proper final rejection (filling an improper rejection wastes the examiner's time, they would have to withdraw finality and issue another action), get the RCE count, and then get another first action count as less time is required to examine the application after RCE. The examiner has already preformed the vast majority of the reasearch.
Um, the average patent examiner is not a kid out of college, but has several years expereince in examination (most examiners are in the GS-11-14 pay grades, not 5-9). When you reject a patent, you dont get a stern lecture from your superior. Most likely you will get a response from the applicant which argues your rejection, adds additional claim limitations, or provides an affidavit which proves conception or reduction to practice of the invention prior to the date of your reference.
Most applications are not allowed on the first try, they are rejected several times before they are allowed, or abandonded by the applicant. That is, the applicant pays a bunch of money for a request for continued examination, or the applicant has ammended the claims enough not to read on the prior art.
Examiners get paid the same wether they allow a case, or reject a case. The applicant pays money nearly every time they file a response to the examiner. It doesnt matter to the examiner if they allow or reject because it counts towards your quota either way.
it was a multiplayer online FPS with different levels. each time you leveled up you had access to more skills, vehicles, equipment etc. http://planetside.station.sony.com/
Got through about 8 episodes that were on the scifi channel then deleted the rest off my replaytv, couldnt stomach the characters, the situations or the dialouge. I really liked Angel, and was hoping for similiar direction, but firefly just never felt right.
Personally I prefer the new BSG for newer scifi TV. Much harder, much more serious.
i was under the impression that the freedom from religion bits int he first ammendments were placed in there because each state had its own established church, thus preveting the federal government from picking one interpretation of faith over the other.
Most people don't seem to understand that what this apparently does is get rid of the requirements dealing with interferences.
In particular the requirements of 35 USC 102 F and G.
The parent poster is describing exactly the following situtation:
Occasionally two or more applications are filed by different inventors claiming substantially the same patentable invention. The patent can only be granted to one of them, and a proceeding known as an "interference" is instituted by the Office to determine who is the first inventor and entitled to the patent. About one percent of the applications filed become involved in an interference proceeding. Interference proceedings may also be instituted between an application and a patent already issued, provided the patent has not been issued for more than one year prior to the filing of the conflicting application, and provided that the conflicting application is not barred from being patentable for some other reason.
(from http://inventors.about.com/library/bl/toc/blusptoi nterference.htm)
An interference proceeding, also known as priority contest, is an inter partes proceeding to determine the priority issues of multiple patent applications. It is a unique patent law concept of the United States. Unlike most other country that adopts the first to file system, the first to invent system of the U.S. allows a party who failed to file a patent application on time to challenge the inventorship against another party with a granted or pending patent if certain requirements are met.
The reduction to practice is a United States patent law concept. It means the embodiment of the concept of an invention. The date of this embodiment is critical to the determination of priority between inventors in an interference proceeding.
Filing an application is proof that one has reduced the concept to practice, however
This is important because someone can come up with an invention first and have delays which prevented them from filing an application (laziness is not one of them). This is the dilligence requriement of 102 (g)
The best mode requirement is important; it prohibits the inventor from delibrately concealing information which would not let one skilled in the art be able to make and use the invention.
continuation applications are important. typically an inventor gets one patent per invention, but if multiple inventions are disclosed within a specification, an applicant files multiple cases based on the first application, thus establishing an earlier priority date.
ill give you a hint, as an examiner, I get paid the same if I allow a patent, or reject a patent.
the office might get more money through renewal fees on a patent, but the examiner does not get paid any more.
any opinions are my own and not that of the office
There was an Star Trek TNG episode which basically said that all life had been seeded by an originating race billions of years ago. That being the reason why all the species looked alike and could cross breed.
Intelligent design would certainly fit into that mold as well. It does not have to be thechristian/jewish/islamic centric God who created life.
nah the problem is that once you look at something and it seems obvious it is called hindsight, and you are prohibited by law to use hindsight to reject a patent, instead the combination must be obvious for some other reason that the applicants invention.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no reference to any actual patent number within that page. Rather a published patent application. No need to get up in a huff yet.
US2006015812 is not a patent number, merely a publication number.
if you have sufficent training you can stop in a much shorter distance without ABS, its a concept called threshold braking. basically you have to learn where the lockup point is on the brakes, if oyu know where this is, and you don't cross that line, you can brake in the shortest distance possible without the ABS kicking in, or having to pulse the brakes yourself so you don't induce a slide.
unfortunatly, its something you really can't practice on the street. abs is great for the average driver, but it is a hinderance to me in the snow and at the track/autox.
yet oddly enough most ESP, DSC type systems reign you in way to early. a trained track drive can still get closer to the edge than most of these systems allow.
i track and autox my cars, these safety "aides" get turned off because they hinder the performance, and don't allow one to learn properly. same deal as antilock brakes, they stop further than threshold braking.
they are great for the average non enthusiast driver who just wants to go somewhere but doesnt care about getting better. As long as I can still disable them, I have no problem with these features being implemented on cars. Just some recent models you can't turn them all off, for example the new lexus is350!
Yep, thats why I pointed out what attracts people here, asides from people who want some government experience prior to going to law school to persue a career in IP law.
AF responses are supposed to be mailed back out within 30 days of receipt, so you really only have about 10 days to work on them.
I won't comment on the work environment or retention issues, but will say, like just about every other job, people would like a longer deadline. There are remedies being discussed, such as limiting IDS's to the references which are pertinant, and reducing the number of claims, but additonal examiners will certainly help.
oh really....
The PTO recieves quite a few job applications a year. It is a very desireable place to work at due to its benefits, pay and flexible work schedule (if on maxiflex shceudle you can work 80 hours every biweek pretty much any way you want). The vast majority of people do not start as a GS-5 step one. Having a decent GPA, at least a year of work experience, a masters degree and the like result in starting as a gs-5 step 10 or a gs-7-11. Your first promotion is available in 6 months, subsequent promotions are available 1 year from that date. In 4-5 years you make nearly 100k if you start as a gs 5 or 7. There are plenty of bonus's available, and you can work paid overtime and comp time.
The PTO hase absolutely no problems hiring people at all. In fact next year they are looking to hire about 800-1000 people. The main problem is retention.
ah the elusive first action allowance, I think ive had 1 of those in 4 years on a totally new case, though they are nice after RCE.
Yeah it pretty much works the same way, however, most applicants seem to fail to read all of the references of record when I apply them the next time around. Maybe they figure I will forget why I cited the references as pertinant art?
Promotions in the PTO are rapid, you can be a gs-13 or gs-14 in just 4-5 years ($80-95k), where as in other portions of the government it takes an entire career.
Actually, we have no incentive to approve a patent at all. Examiners also recieve a count for abandonment and for requests for continued examination (abandonment by the applicant which starts the clock all over). You just have to wait 6 months from the date of your final rejection.
If anything it is in the examiners best interest to issue a proper final rejection (filling an improper rejection wastes the examiner's time, they would have to withdraw finality and issue another action), get the RCE count, and then get another first action count as less time is required to examine the application after RCE. The examiner has already preformed the vast majority of the reasearch.
id say the first fps with a cool story is system shock or possibly ultima underworld.
Um, the average patent examiner is not a kid out of college, but has several years expereince in examination (most examiners are in the GS-11-14 pay grades, not 5-9). When you reject a patent, you dont get a stern lecture from your superior. Most likely you will get a response from the applicant which argues your rejection, adds additional claim limitations, or provides an affidavit which proves conception or reduction to practice of the invention prior to the date of your reference.
Most applications are not allowed on the first try, they are rejected several times before they are allowed, or abandonded by the applicant. That is, the applicant pays a bunch of money for a request for continued examination, or the applicant has ammended the claims enough not to read on the prior art.
Examiners get paid the same wether they allow a case, or reject a case. The applicant pays money nearly every time they file a response to the examiner. It doesnt matter to the examiner if they allow or reject because it counts towards your quota either way.
yeah it was a great game just before its time
the closest thing today is battlefield 2, but even then you dont have the grand sense of scale as you did with planetside.
it was a multiplayer online FPS with different levels. each time you leveled up you had access to more skills, vehicles, equipment etc.
http://planetside.station.sony.com/
Ive seen the show but not the movie.
Got through about 8 episodes that were on the scifi channel then deleted the rest off my replaytv, couldnt stomach the characters, the situations or the dialouge. I really liked Angel, and was hoping for similiar direction, but firefly just never felt right.
Personally I prefer the new BSG for newer scifi TV. Much harder, much more serious.
Lack of games.
harder to show cost/benefit analysis to bosses
real UNIX is cooler.
wow id love to find a theater that charges ~6.20 a ticket, thats less than a matinee in the DC area, let along an evening show which is 9.50+
i was under the impression that the freedom from religion bits int he first ammendments were placed in there because each state had its own established church, thus preveting the federal government from picking one interpretation of faith over the other.
not a big concern
apple just has to show conception and reduction to practice prior to microsoft and show due dilligence
see 102 F and G
Most people don't seem to understand that what this apparently does is get rid of the requirements dealing with interferences.
i nterference.htm)
i nge
In particular the requirements of 35 USC 102 F and G.
The parent poster is describing exactly the following situtation:
Occasionally two or more applications are filed by different inventors claiming substantially the same patentable invention. The patent can only be granted to one of them, and a proceeding known as an "interference" is instituted by the Office to determine who is the first inventor and entitled to the patent. About one percent of the applications filed become involved in an interference proceeding. Interference proceedings may also be instituted between an application and a patent already issued, provided the patent has not been issued for more than one year prior to the filing of the conflicting application, and provided that the conflicting application is not barred from being patentable for some other reason.
(from http://inventors.about.com/library/bl/toc/bluspto
An interference proceeding, also known as priority contest, is an inter partes proceeding to determine the priority issues of multiple patent applications. It is a unique patent law concept of the United States. Unlike most other country that adopts the first to file system, the first to invent system of the U.S. allows a party who failed to file a patent application on time to challenge the inventorship against another party with a granted or pending patent if certain requirements are met.
The reduction to practice is a United States patent law concept. It means the embodiment of the concept of an invention. The date of this embodiment is critical to the determination of priority between inventors in an interference proceeding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interference_proceed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduction_to_practic
Filing an application is proof that one has reduced the concept to practice, however
This is important because someone can come up with an invention first and have delays which prevented them from filing an application (laziness is not one of them). This is the dilligence requriement of 102 (g)
The best mode requirement is important; it prohibits the inventor from delibrately concealing information which would not let one skilled in the art be able to make and use the invention.
continuation applications are important. typically an inventor gets one patent per invention, but if multiple inventions are disclosed within a specification, an applicant files multiple cases based on the first application, thus establishing an earlier priority date.
ill give you a hint, as an examiner, I get paid the same if I allow a patent, or reject a patent.
the office might get more money through renewal fees on a patent, but the examiner does not get paid any more.
any opinions are my own and not that of the office
AS i recall, Tengen's game's lacked the Nintendo seal of approval/quality.
Games worked just fine though.
Crusader: no remorse/regret, the graphics still impress me 10 years later
diablo, though I guess worlds of warcraft is the sequel
the falcon series of flight simulators
return to castle wolfenstien using the doom 3 engine
privateer
There was an Star Trek TNG episode which basically said that all life had been seeded by an originating race billions of years ago. That being the reason why all the species looked alike and could cross breed.
Intelligent design would certainly fit into that mold as well. It does not have to be thechristian/jewish/islamic centric God who created life.
examiners already are paid quite a bit, you usually start around 50k and can hit 90k in 4-5 years once you pass the primary examiner program.
i work as an examiner as well, there is no pressure to approve in our art area, its more the other way around
nah the problem is that once you look at something and it seems obvious it is called hindsight, and you are prohibited by law to use hindsight to reject a patent, instead the combination must be obvious for some other reason that the applicants invention.