I recently worked for a firm that examines PCT applications under contract to the USPTO. My job required me to write very detailed office actions, mapping every element of every claim to a corresponding element in the prior art references. It does not seem to me that examiners for US applications put as much care into their examinations. I often get rejections that are very vague, with several claims lumped together, and no indication that the examiner has considered every limitation. I would like to see more time spent on writing more detailed office actions, particularly the first office action.
Idea No. 2