The first review can be binding, so a peer reviewer is forbidden from overriding any findings of prior art. Appeals could require litigation or.exponentially increasing fees
.
1. What is wrong with revising a patent based on Patent Office feedback? "P.O.:This is objectionable for reasons x, y, z" , "Applicant: Ok, thanks, I'll change x, y, z so as not to be objectionable". This seems like a reasonable exchange on the face of it.
2. How will you distinguish 'revisions' from 'new' patents that are substantially similar to previous patent applications?
Remember that some companies (MSFT/Google/IBM) file for many, many patents every year.
Ideally, the rejection should go in a searchable database/knowledgebase and prevent from anyone else, including the original filer from filling again.