<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PTO Considering Significant Increase in RCE Fee</title>
	<atom:link href="http://inventivestep.net/2009/02/17/pto-considering-significant-increase-in-rce-fee/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://inventivestep.net/2009/02/17/pto-considering-significant-increase-in-rce-fee/</link>
	<description>A blog dedicated to a discussion of patent law issues and strategies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:23:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Looming Crisis at BPAI &#171; Inventive Step</title>
		<link>http://inventivestep.net/2009/02/17/pto-considering-significant-increase-in-rce-fee/#comment-412</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Looming Crisis at BPAI &#171; Inventive Step]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:25:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inventivestep.net/?p=484#comment-412</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Although completely unsurprising, the increase in appeal filings is putting the BPAI in an impossible situation.  It wasn&#8217;t too many years ago that appeals at the BPAI took 3+ years between the filing of the brief and a decision.  This discouraged the filing of appeals and gave examiners greater power knowing that it was unlikely their decisions would be appealed.  The BPAI did a great job of reducing its backload in recent years by issuing many decisions in less than a year.  Now, however, it appears we are headed back to the days of 3+ years pendency.  Presumably, the number of appeals filed will decline again when this starts to happen. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Although completely unsurprising, the increase in appeal filings is putting the BPAI in an impossible situation.  It wasn&#8217;t too many years ago that appeals at the BPAI took 3+ years between the filing of the brief and a decision.  This discouraged the filing of appeals and gave examiners greater power knowing that it was unlikely their decisions would be appealed.  The BPAI did a great job of reducing its backload in recent years by issuing many decisions in less than a year.  Now, however, it appears we are headed back to the days of 3+ years pendency.  Presumably, the number of appeals filed will decline again when this starts to happen. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PTO Publishes Rules Agenda for 2009 &#171; Inventive Step</title>
		<link>http://inventivestep.net/2009/02/17/pto-considering-significant-increase-in-rce-fee/#comment-301</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[PTO Publishes Rules Agenda for 2009 &#171; Inventive Step]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 19:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://inventivestep.net/?p=484#comment-301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] In these times when the PTO is struggling with reduced filings and reduced revenue, that they certainly won&#8217;t be reducing these fees.  This sounds suspiciously like the rumor about a significant raise to the RCE fee. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] In these times when the PTO is struggling with reduced filings and reduced revenue, that they certainly won&#8217;t be reducing these fees.  This sounds suspiciously like the rumor about a significant raise to the RCE fee. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

