I should clarify my last response. Yes, I would agree that the actual recipients of our emails may have considered our concerns an "annoyance". But the people those letters were forwarded to, probably with a note saying "Please look into this", probably saw it as an action item. Depending on their level of respect for their superiors and the frequency of such messages/actions, it may be considered a priority action item.

That and the last paragraph (below) are the basic thrust of this post, but I'm bored so I'll elaborate (read on only if equally bored! LOL But please do catch the last paragraph.).

I'll just speak from similar experience. For the majority of my career, I held positions where it was my (and my department's) responsibility to oversee the actions of others (other organizations/departments). With titles of Supervisor, Logistics Operations Control (Space Shuttle) and Manager, Contracts Compliance and Support, it's pretty obvious what the functions basically entailed.

While in Logistics, we would have gotten excited to an exagerated degree regarding reported disregard of a priority handling requirement, in an organization like the USPTO with enormous backlogs it might not cause much excitement (unless "the names on the papers" spark attention).

But, in any of the positions I held, if I received notice from on high (highest) of a disregard for the law (statutory instruction), THAT would get immediate attention. Even if the "offense" was seemingly trivial.

But I admit that the Government/USPTO is a "different animal". This perceived infraction of the law (repeat examination of same prior art) doesn't have the same ramifications as in private enterprise. Nobody's going to jail. Nobody's going to shut down operations. Nobody's likely to sue. Nobody's going to get fired.

But it could be a black mark in somebody's personnel file, or may effect their candidacy for a promotion/raise or impact their standing in the organization (assuming they care). Here I'm talking about the examiner, his supervisor, and the people in the oversight organization (who received the emails). The people capable of acting on our concerns.

We may see action. We might not. But I feel a whole lot better knowing those emails were sent, to whom they were sent, and where they wound up. The action is in the right hands if they choose to act, and it's reasonable to expect they will. It's a whole lot better state than just hoping the examiner wakes up some day.

FWIW,

SGE