The US Patent and Trademark Office slave labors scientist and engineers to lawyers. The so called PCT program is being used by CIP to help teach the lawyers science. The letter below was sent to the USPTO but they said it was their first complaint and it really doesn't matter. The DOL comes next and I will see if violation of federal labor laws matter to them. The head slaver is Frank, owner of CIP and someone that asks the newly hired scientist to write training manuals for free, no compensation offered, but you would look good.
Dear USPTO
I am writing the letter to discloseabuses by companies you hired to write PCT reports. The position is alie and is tantamount to slave labor/indentured servitude. On manyoccasions I have performed work that took so long to complete that Imade less then minimum wage. The contract stated I would make $300per day, $78,000 pear year, no vacation, holidays, sick leave, or anyother benefit besides health insurance. I made less than $35,000 lastyear and I am on par for making the same amount this year. The position is designed for writingPCT reports, the searcher and writer get $300, and the reviewer gets$125. The problem with this is that the number of claims and thedifficulty of the search could take up to 5 days or more for a searchto be completed. The number of claims do matter. Private searches bycompanies are done by the number of claims, yet PCT searches are paidper search, even if it is 150 claims and 5 days of work it is stilljust $300. The USPTO confirmed to me that they do not pay theiremployees on a case per case basis since some cases take a long time, and nobody would work for them if that was the pay. So if the USPTOdoesn't pay their own employees on a case per case basis, and privatesearch firms don't charge on a case per case basis either, then whywould the PCT program do this unless there was a desire to abusepeople. The reviewers are typically attorneysthat do not understand science or engineering. Many reviewers send acase back asking for changes that do not make sense to those withexperience in the field. Since the two companies doing PCT searchesare both privately owned search firms the lawyers are always correct. Fighting over and over with inexperienced attorneys over their lackof education and/or experience or worse teaching them the science sothey understand it and pass the case adds to the time spent at thepositions, and lowers the overall wage. The reviewers are also the classifiersand searchers themselves. They classify a case and then have theoption to choose the cases they want, so only long and difficultcases are left over for the rest. Management swears they have peopledoing a case per day, but if you question them about case size theyinsist that is irrelevant. If case size didn't matter then why are theprivate searchers and USPTO employees not paid on a case per casebasis (see above)? So all in all the positions is a liethat is tantamount to slave labor, I personally have spent 10 daysand over 100 hours on a case to just get paid $300, that is $3 perhour and much less then minimum wage. The position is not a case perday position and there is no working out in the wash. If the positionwas a case per day position then for every two day case I have Iwould end up with two cases taking a half day each. Whereas I havegotten many 2 day cases I have never had 2 cases in one day, and Ihave had about 3 cases that were half day searches. I have had many2,3 and even 4 day cases, not many 1 day or 8 hour cases. Finally Iwould like to point out to make the money I do make I work onChristmas, Easter, Memorial day, 4th of July... There isnot a day I do not work and since there is no vacation I have not hada vacation in several years since if I do I go hungry, or can't payrent. As it is I cannot pay student loans, doctors, dentist or evenby food this month without borrowing money. It is a lawyer run business wherescientists are indentured to the lawyers and the lawyers have no clueabout science or engineering. For some reason I don't think this wasit. If the contract I signed is invalid then the USPTO should nothave allowed them the manage this program, nor take my finger printsand call me a USPTO subcontractor. Anonymous.
0 comments