[Patents] USPTO second examination as a biased random coin flip?

[Luuk.van.Dijk@xs4all.nl (Luuk van Dijk)]

L.S.

It was brought to my attention that the USPTO has (lately?)
modified its procedures by having a second examiner
completely independently re-evaluate an application.

My (unconfirmed, but usually pretty well-informed) source 
stated that thereby the number of granted patents had been
cut from approximately 60% to 35%.

First, I'd like to know if these numbers are accurate, secondly,
I can't help noticing that 35% equals 'approximately 60%' squared,
i.e. these numbers seem to imply that the result of the second 
examination is completely UNcorrelated to the result of the first one.

Now a correlation between the first and second evaluation
could mean that the USPTO was properly researching or that
the second evaluation was not that independent, but the
complete absence of correlation can only mean that the granting
is a (60% biased) random coin flip, on every turn of the evaluation
process.  Am I right or do I miss something important here, or is 
my math wrong?

Thanks in advance for any comments,
        Luuk van Dijk

___________________________________________________
Mind over Matter                     lvd@mndmttr.nl
The Netherlands                tel +31 6 224 97 227
___________________________________________________