.jpg)
Looking forward seeing you there !
EQEtools
01/09/2012
23/08/2012
New website, updated tools and a lot more ...
I will terminate the activities on this Blog soon and will continue on an independent website running a more sophisticated content management system.
The system will have more functionality compared to the blogspot platform (which actually is quite good for blogging). Users may (but don't have to) register for an account and may participate in a forum, start their own blog or even create other content and tools. Such functionality will be introduced over time and will not be available right away. The download section will (hopefully) be more transparent as well.
Right now, I'm finalising the layout of the website and making all the settings needed to get started. In the meantime I will need to copy some of the content of this blog to the website and revise the currently available tools.
So, there is still some work to be done, but at least there is some activity again. Expected launch date is September 1.
12/01/2012
G Summary Updated
An update of the G Summary can be found here.
Some minor additions and/or corrections were made and summaries of new decisions/ opinions were added.
Download here....
Some minor additions and/or corrections were made and summaries of new decisions/ opinions were added.
Download here....
10/11/2011
Coffee Break Questions v2
Dear EQETools ,
We are contacting you today as you've previously subscribed to our Coffee Break EQE questions. This is a series of 50 questions & answers that were delivered to your inbox, by the European Patent Academy of the EPO.
We are pleased to announce that this year we have a 2nd version of these questions available, with 50 new questions on European (EPC and PCT) patent law and practice.
The new course is in a similar format, where you receive an email with a question every 3 days, and the answer will follow with the subsequent email.
We are please to announce that you can now receive these emails in the 3 official languages of the EPO, German, English or French.
You can also switch between languages at any time. Test yourself to see if you are capable of understanding these emails in another language.
Arrives every morning before 10am
Version 2 of the Coffee Break EQE questions has a new feature where you will recieve the emails before 10am each morning, just in time for your morning coffee break.
Some of our users had reported that these emails were arriving at times that were not suitable for coffee drinking.
To sign up visit http://www.eqe-online.org/tools/coffee.php.
Regards,
EQE-online.org Team
European Patent Academy
www.eqe-online.org
We are contacting you today as you've previously subscribed to our Coffee Break EQE questions. This is a series of 50 questions & answers that were delivered to your inbox, by the European Patent Academy of the EPO.
We are pleased to announce that this year we have a 2nd version of these questions available, with 50 new questions on European (EPC and PCT) patent law and practice.
The new course is in a similar format, where you receive an email with a question every 3 days, and the answer will follow with the subsequent email.
We are please to announce that you can now receive these emails in the 3 official languages of the EPO, German, English or French.
You can also switch between languages at any time. Test yourself to see if you are capable of understanding these emails in another language.
Arrives every morning before 10am
Version 2 of the Coffee Break EQE questions has a new feature where you will recieve the emails before 10am each morning, just in time for your morning coffee break.
Some of our users had reported that these emails were arriving at times that were not suitable for coffee drinking.
To sign up visit http://www.eqe-online.org/tools/coffee.php.
Regards,
EQE-online.org Team
European Patent Academy
www.eqe-online.org
Have fun !!
21/10/2011
Tutor meeting 2011 : Paper D
Below a summary of the notes made during the Tutor meeting of last week. The summary is based on my interpretation of what was discussed.
This year’s paper D was considered by the EC (Examination Committee) as an average paper with the right level of difficulty.
In general the EC made several comments:
- Tutors should teach candidates the law and also teach them how to apply it. These are two separate aspects. In particular the board wants to see that the candidate realises what a patent right is, what he can do with it, what the patent law is and how it is applied. The knowledge should be in-depth.
- Candidates need to make sure that they very carefully read the question and then answer this question. Sometimes a correct answer is given to something that is not asked. Especially in D2 make sure that the question is fully understood.
- Questions like “Legal situation?” in D2 are no longer asked. Instead the EC asks more specific questions to guide the candidate towards the desired answer.
- More than 100 marks are available for a D paper, especially more than 60 marks can be scored for D2. The EC did not so say how many more.
- EC stresses that they want to see an advice based on application of the law. This is often not understood by candidates leading to loss of marks.
- Usually one citation for legal basis is sufficient. If for example a G decision is cited in the GL then there is no need to cite both the Guidelines and the G decision. Higher ranking provisions are preferred.
- There is no recipe for taking the exam. Candidates need to know the law and know how to apply it.
- The exam is setup so that a wrong turn in the argumentation is not fatal.
- There are no “negative points” in paper D.
- No marks are rewarded for knowing the EPO practice which has no legal basis.
- There are no “hidden” questions. However candidates must carefully investigate and deal with the consequences of a certain problem and are usually expected to deal with these consequences.
- Usually there are four or five issues in D2 to be dealt with. Answerring 3 correct will likely mean a candidate passes. Even with only two issues dealt with correctly and a well made D1 may result in passing the paper.
- The EC would like people to pass, but has to apply a high standard to guarantee a certain quality.
- D1 and D2 are marked seperately, but if the score of a candidate is “borderline” sometimes the paper as a whole will be looked at to make a final decision.
- Don’t submit lists of abbreviations. These will only cost time and cause confusion with the EC.
- Knowing the case law (except for the key decisions) is not an absolute requirement for passing the D paper. Of course it is preferred if a candidate has a fair knowledge of the case law.
Some Q and A
Q: Would it be possible to publish a simulation on how an actual paper is marked, preferably three different solutions good-average-bad ?
A: No, this is not possible for privacy reasons.
Q: How precise does reference to legal basis have to be?
A: That depends on the legal basis. If it is a PCT article with several paragraphs be as precise as possible.
Q: Why does the EC not indicate the amount of marks for D2 questions ?
A: Because the final “golden solution” is only defined based on the answers by the candidates. The marking scheme is only then defined.
Q: How and by whom is the exam tested?
A: By “guinea pigs”.
Q: This year the exam (D2) contained 30% more words compared to last year(s). This is disadvantageous for candidates that don’t have a mothertongue in an official language. What is your view on this ?
A: This should not be a problem. There is plenty of time to score more than 50 marks in total. Time pressure is something that is taught by tutors. The exam can be passed without having to feel severe time pressure.
Q: The D2 exam often has questions half-way the text. Is it intended that these should be answerred prior to reading the rest of the text?
A: Not necessarily. It is up to the candidate to decide how to answer the paper. The position of the questions is merely a guidance to help candidates structure their answer.
R: The EC does not take into account the time pressure of the exam.
A: If a candidate knows and understands the law he can answer each question. Moreover a candidate only needs to score 50 marks to pass. A candidate will only feel time pressure if he wants to score more than 80 marks. The time pressure is something that tutors teach their students and/or comes from a lack of thorough knowledge on the EPC.
Other remarks (also by other tutors):
- Read the question => know the answer => (always) find and check legal basis => write down the answer and cite legal basis.
- For D1 it is probably better to have an answer for each question than trying to get full marks for only part of them.
- There is no “recipe” or “standard approach” for the exam.
- Mention the date of the exam on your paper. The advice is supposed to be given on the day of the exam, which is “today”. Quote: "Today is today and there can be no doubt or discussion about that "
This year’s paper D was considered by the EC (Examination Committee) as an average paper with the right level of difficulty.
In general the EC made several comments:
- Tutors should teach candidates the law and also teach them how to apply it. These are two separate aspects. In particular the board wants to see that the candidate realises what a patent right is, what he can do with it, what the patent law is and how it is applied. The knowledge should be in-depth.
- Candidates need to make sure that they very carefully read the question and then answer this question. Sometimes a correct answer is given to something that is not asked. Especially in D2 make sure that the question is fully understood.
- Questions like “Legal situation?” in D2 are no longer asked. Instead the EC asks more specific questions to guide the candidate towards the desired answer.
- More than 100 marks are available for a D paper, especially more than 60 marks can be scored for D2. The EC did not so say how many more.
- EC stresses that they want to see an advice based on application of the law. This is often not understood by candidates leading to loss of marks.
- Usually one citation for legal basis is sufficient. If for example a G decision is cited in the GL then there is no need to cite both the Guidelines and the G decision. Higher ranking provisions are preferred.
- There is no recipe for taking the exam. Candidates need to know the law and know how to apply it.
- The exam is setup so that a wrong turn in the argumentation is not fatal.
- There are no “negative points” in paper D.
- No marks are rewarded for knowing the EPO practice which has no legal basis.
- There are no “hidden” questions. However candidates must carefully investigate and deal with the consequences of a certain problem and are usually expected to deal with these consequences.
- Usually there are four or five issues in D2 to be dealt with. Answerring 3 correct will likely mean a candidate passes. Even with only two issues dealt with correctly and a well made D1 may result in passing the paper.
- The EC would like people to pass, but has to apply a high standard to guarantee a certain quality.
- D1 and D2 are marked seperately, but if the score of a candidate is “borderline” sometimes the paper as a whole will be looked at to make a final decision.
- Don’t submit lists of abbreviations. These will only cost time and cause confusion with the EC.
- Knowing the case law (except for the key decisions) is not an absolute requirement for passing the D paper. Of course it is preferred if a candidate has a fair knowledge of the case law.
Some Q and A
Q: Would it be possible to publish a simulation on how an actual paper is marked, preferably three different solutions good-average-bad ?
A: No, this is not possible for privacy reasons.
Q: How precise does reference to legal basis have to be?
A: That depends on the legal basis. If it is a PCT article with several paragraphs be as precise as possible.
Q: Why does the EC not indicate the amount of marks for D2 questions ?
A: Because the final “golden solution” is only defined based on the answers by the candidates. The marking scheme is only then defined.
Q: How and by whom is the exam tested?
A: By “guinea pigs”.
Q: Who are those “guinea pigs” ?
A: People…. Q: This year the exam (D2) contained 30% more words compared to last year(s). This is disadvantageous for candidates that don’t have a mothertongue in an official language. What is your view on this ?
A: This should not be a problem. There is plenty of time to score more than 50 marks in total. Time pressure is something that is taught by tutors. The exam can be passed without having to feel severe time pressure.
Q: The D2 exam often has questions half-way the text. Is it intended that these should be answerred prior to reading the rest of the text?
A: Not necessarily. It is up to the candidate to decide how to answer the paper. The position of the questions is merely a guidance to help candidates structure their answer.
R: The EC does not take into account the time pressure of the exam.
A: If a candidate knows and understands the law he can answer each question. Moreover a candidate only needs to score 50 marks to pass. A candidate will only feel time pressure if he wants to score more than 80 marks. The time pressure is something that tutors teach their students and/or comes from a lack of thorough knowledge on the EPC.
Other remarks (also by other tutors):
- Read the question => know the answer => (always) find and check legal basis => write down the answer and cite legal basis.
- For D1 it is probably better to have an answer for each question than trying to get full marks for only part of them.
- There is no “recipe” or “standard approach” for the exam.
- Mention the date of the exam on your paper. The advice is supposed to be given on the day of the exam, which is “today”. Quote: "Today is today and there can be no doubt or discussion about that "
Hope this is of any use.
For tutors having additional remarks or another opinion on what was said, feel free to post a comment.
20/10/2011
Want to protect your mobile phone ? A sock might work ...
The excellent K's Law blog summarised a recent decision by the Board of Appeal. In itself the decision was not all that surprising, yet for those preparing for the EQE, in particular for the new pre-exam, the summary might be worth reading.
The Board examines (inter alia) whether or not a sock may anticipate a claim directed to a protective casing for for example a mobile phone. The decision contains an excellent summary of the "suitable for doctrine".
Read the summary here.
Some more general comments about the pre-exam (derived from last weeks tutor meeting) will follow soon...
The Board examines (inter alia) whether or not a sock may anticipate a claim directed to a protective casing for for example a mobile phone. The decision contains an excellent summary of the "suitable for doctrine".
Read the summary here.
Some more general comments about the pre-exam (derived from last weeks tutor meeting) will follow soon...
21/09/2011
Claiming priority more than 12 months after filing date of a first application ?
Understanding how the right to priority works is one of the basic skills of a patent attorney (trainee). Let's face it, if you don't understand how that works you better not take papers C and D yet ...
Anyway, I can imagine there may be confusion about actually obtaining the right of priority to an earlier application and the claiming of said right. For a valid priority right you need to file your priority-claiming application at the latest 12 months after you filed the priority application.
If you file a PCT application after the 12 month period, but within 2m thereof PCT time limits will still run from the priority date nevertheless. But does that mean you have a valid priority claim ? Find the answer including legal basis here.
Check for yourself if the EPC has similar provisions ...
Anyway, I can imagine there may be confusion about actually obtaining the right of priority to an earlier application and the claiming of said right. For a valid priority right you need to file your priority-claiming application at the latest 12 months after you filed the priority application.
If you file a PCT application after the 12 month period, but within 2m thereof PCT time limits will still run from the priority date nevertheless. But does that mean you have a valid priority claim ? Find the answer including legal basis here.
Check for yourself if the EPC has similar provisions ...
04/06/2011
Updating ......
I will start updating this website/blog soon; especially the files for download.
I may take the site off line for a while, but don't worry .....
01/04/2011
12/03/2011
Procedural Law under the EPC-2000, 2nd Edition, 2011
Andreas Veronese and Peter Watchhorn have updated their book "Procedural Law under the EPC-2000, 2nd Edition, 2011". The book can be purchased from their website, http://www.epc-compass.com.
Andreas and Peter write the following:
"We have updated the book to the legal changes which have entered into force over the last three years since the publication of the first edition in 2008. In particular, the "Raising the Bar" rule changes have been explained in this second edition (search limitations, time limits for filing divisional applications, provision of search results on claimed priorities, indication of amendments and their basis and mandatory response to the European search opinion or the Written Opinion prepared by the EPO in the PCT). We also dealt with the reform of the fee system (the unitary designation fee, shortened pre-payment of the renewal fees, page fees due on filing etc) which came into force in 2009 and the transitional provisions for all of these changes are also dealt with in this second edition, where relevant.
This second edition of "Procedural Law" is suitable for the study for, and for use in the EQE of 2012 (as is the second edition of our book "PCT Procedures and Passage into the European Phase" published last year)."
For those who are familiar with this book (or the book on the PCT they also wrote) please post your opinion/ review as a comment.
23/02/2011
Good luck !!!
To all of you doing the EQE next week I wish you a lot of success and good luck !
Use the coming weekend to organise your study materials that you plan on taking to the exam. For the rest, try to relax as much as possible (I know, easy for me to say :-)).
If you used any of the materials available on this website, I hope it helped you in your preparation.
Feel free to send me comments and/or recommendations so I can update and improve the tools. I realise the activity on this blog has been low for quite some time, yet I can assure you that EQETools will stay.
Use the coming weekend to organise your study materials that you plan on taking to the exam. For the rest, try to relax as much as possible (I know, easy for me to say :-)).
If you used any of the materials available on this website, I hope it helped you in your preparation.
Feel free to send me comments and/or recommendations so I can update and improve the tools. I realise the activity on this blog has been low for quite some time, yet I can assure you that EQETools will stay.
30/12/2010
Updated PCT Newsletter summary
An updated PCT newsletter summary is available in the download section of this website. The summary contains the practical advices of all newsletters and some further information that I thought could be useful. Of course you should judge for yourself if the summary is complete enough to take to the EQE. The practical advices usually are quite good studying material. Try to answer the question yourself first before reading the answer....did you come up with the same ???
Don't forget to get yourself a copy of the excellent book on the PCT by Cees Mulder !
Don't forget to get yourself a copy of the excellent book on the PCT by Cees Mulder !
Updated document Implementing Regulations
The Implementing Regulations will change per January 1, 2011.
New Rule 70(b)
Amended Rule 141
NOTE: DO NOT USE THESE AMENDED RULES FOR THE EQE 2011 !!!
You can find the updated editable document in the download area, or by clicking here.
New Rule 70(b)
Amended Rule 141
NOTE: DO NOT USE THESE AMENDED RULES FOR THE EQE 2011 !!!
You can find the updated editable document in the download area, or by clicking here.
Updated G Summary available !!!
I know you have all been waiting for this and reminded me from time to time that it was still not there. I told most of you that I would post an updated version well before the EQE. Well, good news, the G Summary has been updated and is now available for download. Either go to the download pages, or click here for a direct download.
I wish you all the best for 2011 !!
PS: Note that the EQETools LinkedIN group is steadily growing. Feel free to join the group and post your questions, concerns, thoughts etc. etc.
I wish you all the best for 2011 !!
PS: Note that the EQETools LinkedIN group is steadily growing. Feel free to join the group and post your questions, concerns, thoughts etc. etc.
03/12/2010
Updated document Implementing Regulations
In view of the amendment of Rule 36 effective from October 26, 2010 an updated version of the Rules is now available for download.
11/10/2010
Coffee break questions from the EPO
Surfing the EPO website I found a link that allows automatic e-mails be sent containing what the EPO calls "Coffee Break Questions". So far I have received two of such questions, see below for an example.
The EPO PschorrHöfe building in the Bayerstrasse (not the main building, but the one across the street) has a very nice "sky bar" for EPO employees (or lost attorneys :-)) to enjoy a good coffee after an excellent lunch. This is not the place for people wanting a quick shot of caffeine but rather a place to stay around for some time, to enjoy the view over Munich and of course the coffee.
Why am I writing this down ...
Well, first of all because the questions I have received so far are so easy that the coffee break will be very short if you focus solely on the answer of the question. However, this source of questions may nevertheless help you in your preparations by thinking bit further on the specific subject. Doing so may want you to decide to take another cappuccino.
Question one was the following:
An invention can be patented only if it is new. What is the relevant date for determining the state of the art?
- The filing date
- The priority date
- The priority date if there is one, otherwise the filing date
The answer is not difficult, it probably takes a few seconds. However, you may want to consider the following:
- What are the other requirements for patentability? What is the legal basis ?
- What if the claimed invention is not the same invention as in the priority document?
- Following the previous question, what legal basis (Articles, Rules, Case Law) deals with the right to priority, and more specifically what is meant with "the same invention".
- What is the difference between prior art under Article 54(2) an 54(3) ? How is this related to the priority issue.
- What are the requirements for getting a filing date? Legal basis?
- etc. etc.
You can subscribe at the EQE-Online website.
Enjoy your coffee !!!
The EPO PschorrHöfe building in the Bayerstrasse (not the main building, but the one across the street) has a very nice "sky bar" for EPO employees (or lost attorneys :-)) to enjoy a good coffee after an excellent lunch. This is not the place for people wanting a quick shot of caffeine but rather a place to stay around for some time, to enjoy the view over Munich and of course the coffee.
Why am I writing this down ...
Well, first of all because the questions I have received so far are so easy that the coffee break will be very short if you focus solely on the answer of the question. However, this source of questions may nevertheless help you in your preparations by thinking bit further on the specific subject. Doing so may want you to decide to take another cappuccino.
Question one was the following:
An invention can be patented only if it is new. What is the relevant date for determining the state of the art?
- The filing date
- The priority date
- The priority date if there is one, otherwise the filing date
The answer is not difficult, it probably takes a few seconds. However, you may want to consider the following:
- What are the other requirements for patentability? What is the legal basis ?
- What if the claimed invention is not the same invention as in the priority document?
- Following the previous question, what legal basis (Articles, Rules, Case Law) deals with the right to priority, and more specifically what is meant with "the same invention".
- What is the difference between prior art under Article 54(2) an 54(3) ? How is this related to the priority issue.
- What are the requirements for getting a filing date? Legal basis?
- etc. etc.
You can subscribe at the EQE-Online website.
Enjoy your coffee !!!
03/10/2010
Looking for fellow EQE candidates ?
If you're looking for fellow EQE candidates and discuss about the exams, the EQE-online forum may be your choice.
An alternative for you to consider may be the EQETools LinkedIN group that is in existing for some time now, offering you not only the chance to post your concerns, questions and thoughts but also to expand your professional network. Being a European Patent Attorney allows you to do your job in all countries of the Convention (if you would like that of course ...). So, knowing some people here and there may be beneficial for your future career. Needless to say there's a lot more advantages that the LinkedIN network has to offer.
The group is open to both EQE candidates as qualified attorneys.
You can join the group by going to the LinkedIn website and browse for the group EQETools. There you can request to join (you need to sign in first).
01/10/2010
More free EQE resources
Some time ago the website www.cyberepc.com was launched. The idea behind this website is to provide an online source of information related to the EPC. Articles, Rules Guidelines and further information is all (hyper)linked so it is easy to navigate and find the provisions that you need. All that said the website was not primarily developed for EQE candidates.
CyberEPC has today expanded it's scope also to those looking for information and tools related to the EQE. You can find the "EQE Workspace" here.
A nice thing about the CyberEPC is that it is available in all three official languages of the EPC. For those wondering what these languages are, click here :-)
Have a nice weekend!
CyberEPC has today expanded it's scope also to those looking for information and tools related to the EQE. You can find the "EQE Workspace" here.
A nice thing about the CyberEPC is that it is available in all three official languages of the EPC. For those wondering what these languages are, click here :-)
Have a nice weekend!
29/09/2010
G1/09 : Refused but still pending ...
The excellent IP weblog IPKat reported the publication on the EPO register of G1/09. The summary on this weblog tells the story so I will limit this post to the decision itself:
In the case where no appeal is filed, a European patent application which has been refused by a decision of the Examining Division is thereafter pending within the meaning of Rule 25 EPC 1973 (Rule 36(1) EPC) until the expiry of the time limit for filing a notice of appeal.
To read the whole decision, click here.
In the case where no appeal is filed, a European patent application which has been refused by a decision of the Examining Division is thereafter pending within the meaning of Rule 25 EPC 1973 (Rule 36(1) EPC) until the expiry of the time limit for filing a notice of appeal.
To read the whole decision, click here.
28/09/2010
The end of Swiss type claims
In G2/08 the use of Swiss type claims was said to be no longer allowed 3 months after publication of the decision in the Official Journal.
The EPO has published a note on their website with more information, click here.
The three month period as determined in G2/08 expires January 28, 2011.
This means that Swiss type claims are no longer allowed in European aplications filed after that date, or having an earliest priority date of January 29, 2011. If any such application contains Swiss-type claims, the applicant will be invited to correct this deficiency.
The paper A tool has been corrected in view of this decision.
Read G2/08 here.
The EPO has published a note on their website with more information, click here.
The three month period as determined in G2/08 expires January 28, 2011.
This means that Swiss type claims are no longer allowed in European aplications filed after that date, or having an earliest priority date of January 29, 2011. If any such application contains Swiss-type claims, the applicant will be invited to correct this deficiency.
The paper A tool has been corrected in view of this decision.
Read G2/08 here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
