000207	05postgrant_wmp_a_16.wma
000000	MICHAEL GORMAN:  Okay now also as I understand it, the Alliance wants a more rigorous pre-grant review.
000008	So what would you like to see done in that regard as far as changing pre-grant reviews or additions, subtractions, etcetera?
000016	TARANEH MAGHAME:  I think this goes back to what Derek was just explaining about the need for additional resources and the need to train
000026	and retain qualified examiners.
000029	They have instituted the Peer to Patent system that is a step in the right direction I think in terms of allowing for third-party submissions on a limited number
000045	of patents right now because it is in the initial phases.
000049	But certainly if that is expanded, that would allow for more rigorous pre-grant review.
000056	I think it really just goes back to the funds that the PTO has, the level of competence of the PTO examiners and the metrics that they are given in terms of,
000111	are they rewarded for the quality of the patents that they approve or the number of patents that they approve?
000117	Because we hear about how little time each examiner is spending on each patent application.
000125	We need to improve that.
000126	So again it goes back to really focusing on improving the functioning of the PTO.
000132	MICHAEL GORMAN:  So you're definitely not okay with the limiting to say a 20-hour, to process a file that some cases occur in the Patent Office,
000141	those kinds of things?
000142	TARANEH MAGHAME:  I think that that needs to be a more subjective determination because for some cases the limitation may be fine.
000149	For other very complex cases that have many claims for example, it might be necessary for the examiner to do a proper job, to spend more time than that.
000200	So artificially limiting the time I think may be part of the problem.
000204	MICHAEL GORMAN:  Okay.