“Your mission, Etna, if you accept it, is to pass parts ABC of the European Qualifying Exam within two attempts. Your dreams of success will collide with mind-bending riddles, highly specialized technology and deadly traps, raising the bar beyond reason, year after year. In an entirely foreign language, you must gather the scattered pieces of a <Possible Solution>, which hold the key to your future career. The time given is a fraction of what you would have in real-life. This WISEflow message will crash your computer in five seconds.”blog.ipappify.de/eqe-equality-missione-impossibile/
I liked the main exam. To me, it was fair and reasonable. I don't get what all the fuss is about..
ReplyDeleteThen you are very lucky to be on the same wavelength as the exam drafters. And I hope you pass everything - you don't want to be back at the "EQE casino" as a resitter.
Delete... and the exams are not just for you.
DeleteUp to 1000 candidates from all EPC states should also be able to pass (if well-prepared).
That goes without saying.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree to you Pete. There is something that the Examination Commitee ignores, the speed on reading is not the same, at least 20% slower for non-native. But at the same time, the comprehension of the texts is not the same as a native one. They eliminated the document in a different official language, and this only could benefit those who have official languages as mother tongue. They should give extra time for those who don't have official languages as a mother tongue.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, there is no way for the EQE system to reliably distinguish between native and non-native speakers based on residency, birthplace, education etc.
DeleteThe post is not just for “non-native” speakers. The spotlight chosen is to highlight the issues that all candidates will face to some degree, and that these issues are getting worse each year. But many in this group are hit the worst – a lot of “non-natives” will NEVER pass the current C exam, and B is heading in that direction. I don’t think that is acceptable for a profession that advertises itself as “pan-european”, and where trainees are competent enough in real-life to do the work of patent attorneys.
ReplyDeleteAll resitters also have a confidence problem – they are afraid to take any risks, so they are even more likely to be overwhelmed and to be blocked by any small inconsistencies in the exam. And most patent attorneys are somewhere on a “control freak” spectrum (usually in the medium to high range 😉), so they often get distracted by small details. And during the stress of the exam, your brain does not work as well as it normally does, turning native speakers into non-native speakers.
So, all candidates will benefit if these “non-native” issues are addressed fairly.
totally agree. I'm a native speaker but even a native speaker like me is so confused at some of the wording/terminology that has been cherry picked by the Examiners.
DeleteSo even if you are a native (or close to native) speaker, you are not guaranteed an easy time. During the exam, it does not matter if you are the only one with a problem, or everyone has the same problem you have to put yourself in the best position for you to pass during each exam. And you want to pass first time because your confidence is sky-high and you are more open to taking risks, such as cutting corners, or skipping parts of the exam.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this general approach as well. In the back of your mind, remember ABC & D2 are exams, so they give you all the pieces you need. During the stress of the exam, you may struggle to understand the invention anyway. During the stress of the exam, you will not be able to judge how strong an argument is, so if you have something, include it. For example, distinguishing features must have an explicit technical effect in the exam, otherwise you cannot generate the argumentation you need. So if you have a piece with a technical effect on B making you novel, or on C when attacking inventive step, that is probably the right piece.
Your goal is to generate as much answer as possible for them to mark within the time available. Look at the marking tables in the examiners report, know where most of the marks are, and spend your time accordingly. Even if you you have the right answer, you will not pass if you dont provide enough “argumentation”. They never award marks for things that you had in your head but did not type in. If you have technical difficulties, they can award a compensation, but that is based on a very limited extrapolation from the answer that you hand-in.
The goal of practicing ABC & D2 exams is to develop the “gut” feeling about each exam by analysing with your “brain” how you did the exam and how close your answer is to what they want. During the exam, you need to switch more to “gut” feeling. D1 is a little similar in that you are trying to figure out what the question is about, but almost all questions are new, so you only will recognise part of them, and you need to use your time precisely.
On A, you need independent claims probably in each category (product, process, use) and as many dependent claims as possible. At least be novel. Claim functionally.
On B, you need novelty and something that looks like an inventive step argument support for each independent claim to pass.. And the support for the amendments. You are defending claims, so if you can find something that can be used, type it in. At least be novel.
For C, you need to attack all independent claims and the “unusual claim” attacks. Do every novelty attack you see. There are no negative marks, unless you contradict yourself. You are attacking the claims, so if you find something that can be used, type it in.
During the exam, you will run into things that you need to figure out – is that the same feature or different, is priority valid etc. This is where the technical understanding is usually needed. But if you cannot figure it out quickly, you need to find a way out. It is perfectly fine to include assumptions as a note to the marker about why you picked an option. By being explicit, it can also help you decide which way to go.
First consider whether it is a side-issue, or less important for marks – if so, make a note for yourself and leave it to the end. If it is a main issue, then the exam is usually set up so that the answer is 80/20, so go with the 80%. If it is 50/50, then there are marks for argumentation. If you are still unsure, pick one, explain any assumptions, and generate at least one answer. They often award marks to alternative answers based on the fact that a lot of people handed them in.
"The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
ReplyDeleteHow do you advise candidates to "adjust their sails" to prepare for next year?
DeleteI would advise them to stay paranoid and study ceaselessly.
DeleteAssuming the C exam in 2024 is the same style as 2023, what should candidates "study ceaselessly" for C?
Delete"Isn't it a pleasure to study and practice what you have learned? Isn't it also great when friends visit from distant places? If one remains not annoyed when he is not understood by people around him, isn't he a sage?"
DeleteYou must be earning a fortune with your "tegeltjeswijsheid" ;-) Do you also sell t-shirts?
Delete"Study and practice what you have learned". You must be in favor of compulsory permanent education for European patent attorneys after the EQE. We can agree on that.
DeleteNO! Just the EQE. DON'T COERCE ME TO STUDYYYYYYYYYY! I will study of my own accord. ;)
DeleteRelease the main eqe results now..!
DeleteOther problems is the complexity of the subject matter nowadays. Its meant to be suitable for a candidate from all backgrounds. Paper A subject this year was too complex. Paper C was also difficult to understand.
ReplyDelete"The word 'impossible' is not in my dictionary."
DeleteIt's a shit dictionary then
Deletewhy?
DeleteI have added a little more explanation about the statistics used in the original post. The issues raised are based on my experience of years of teaching "non-native" and "native" speakers, and the many DM's I have received this year and blog posts that I have seen.
ReplyDeleteThe statistics were included to provide some objective support for these reported experiences. There are a lot of affected candidates who do not complain or appeal because they believe it is completely pointless or they cannot afford it. There is a lack of empathy from those who are fortunate enough to have had a high-degree of EN/FR/GE exposure, full support from their employer (including days off and payment of all costs), and practical experience that is more than just translating. Also, there is a lack of empathy by those fortunate to pass first-time. Many patent attorneys have little empathy anyway because of their technical background (most extreme are males with software or electro-mechanical backgrounds ;-). so it is hoped that they might be convinced by statistics that show an unfair disadvantage against "native speakers".
Italy was chosen because it has a reasonable group size, and most Italians did not grow up learning English to a very high degree. The “non-native” group is very diverse – the best we can do is “Nationality”, which includes a large group who were born and educated in that country. “Nationality” was not available in the past, so I included the “Residency” as well.
The disadvantage of these groups can be seen by comparing their “pass + CF rate” with the same “pass + CF rate” for all candidates.
dayum
ReplyDeleteEPO bureaucrats should not be in charge to assess Patent Attorneys professional skills.
ReplyDeleteThe EPO handles the administration and "front-end", so they are the "face" of the EQE. But the substantive parts of the exam, and the Boards, are a joint EPO/epi responsibility.
DeleteHey Pete, when do you estimate we can expect the statistics for this year's EQE? I'm really curious about the stats for paper D. From everything I heard, they must be pretty devastating. Almost everyone I talked to failed paper D. From the Examiner's report (and comparing it to my results) it appears to me that they were very, very, very strict this year in correcting the answers.
ReplyDeleteThat's also why I am wondering why there is so little discussion concerning the results or at least the Examiner's reports. You have not made a post yet, there are no comments on the DeltaPatents Blog... apart from a couple "Oh look at me how great I am, thanks everyone and mum and dad" posts on LinkedIn there seems to be basically no reaction to the results.
Did the exam turn out so bad that everybody focuses on drafting appeals?
On the other hand, I must admit that my urge to discuss or question the results is also very limited, I am just beyond relieved that I passed (with a compensable fail in D) and don't have to re-sit any paper.
Hi Nick,
Deletefirst a huge congratulations - be very happy that you are finished. And a compensable fail is still a good pass, otherwise they would not allow compensation.
The statistics normally appear at the same time as the examiner reports. Last year they were available on 7 July 2022.
It is difficult to get a good feeling from the posts. And the Examiners reports do not show all solutions awarded marks, so they can sometimes be misleading. Often they want to give a message for future years about what is not acceptable.
I have heard from a few people - it seems pretty mixed. And pretty quiet as well with messages. That does often mean that people have had bad news. But I think also a lot of people are on vacation as well.
I also failed paper D. According to my results, the examiners awarded me with way less points for each answer than I expected (in particular my solution for DII is close to the Delta patents solution). So maybe they were really very strict in correcting the answers. I'm curious for the statistics. Better luck (?) next time.
DeleteI also failed A closely, with a main claim 90% identical to that one in the examiner's report but lost 25 marks for it for some reasons (limitations?). Maybe also strict corrections.
But I passed C and B in the first try, so I'm only half-sad :)
Is it possible to get the corrections of the examiners?
Failed A, it was a very difficult paper and the Examiner's report is very long with various combinations and possibilities. I've never seen a report that long.
DeleteI heard they were quite generous with marking C this year as they probably realized the errors with this paper.
Hi Lola, sorry to hear about your A.
DeleteI have not been able to get a good overview of the results from a few DM's and limited blog posts - I think a lot of people are now on vacation There is a rumor that the passing rate for D is low. I have not heard about anything about C in general.
The official statistics are not yet published, which is a bit unfair to any one thinking of appealing - they are missing key info about the general difficulty level.
Fortunately for many candidates, it is possible to raise the passing rate by being more lenient with the marking, but it also makes it very unpredictable for those preparing for future exams - what should they do, and for resitters, what should they do differently?
When the exams are much too long or technically too complex, the advice to candidates becomes: read quick, don't think, go with your first thought, type a lot, cover as much as you can. This used to be called the "shotgun" approach, and used to always lead to failure.
It is not a problem to pass some of these "shotgun" candidates, but the exams should still be designed to let mostly "fit to practice" candidates pass who need some time to analyse the info provided, and give the most appropriate answers with arguments.
I know which group I would prefer in my attorney firm :-).
I asked helpdesk if they can provide me with my corrected papers but it is not possible. Can't understand that, I really wanted to know what part of my answers was marked and which not. It is somewhat difficult to figure it out via the examiner's report.
DeleteThe exams are marked using a detailed marking sheet which is separate, and these detailed marking sheets are retained by the secretariat. This was also the case when exams were on paper and in-person.
DeleteUnfortunately, they have chosen a system where you cannot get access to them. Candidates have tried through appeals, but with little success, citing national law and even the European Convention on Human Rights.
The official system is that the Examination Board is obliged to provide enough info that candidates can reconstruct their marking. This is mainly the Examiners Report, which includes the detailed marking sheet and the marking instructions for each exam, and some hints about the marking.
So, the official system is that if you can prove that it is not possible to reconstruct your marking, you can get access to the detailed marking sheets. However, I heard from someone who tried this a few years ago, that the DBoA evaluated it themselves, and they stated that it was possible in that case to reconstruct his marking. When he asked how they did it, they said that there is no legal obligation for them to share how they did it.
In practice, it is almost impossible for candidates to figure it out. It was a little easier in the past when the candidates solutions included their global marking sheet, but that is no longer provided.
A general rule of thumb is that for each D1 question and D2 as a whole, D, each sentence represents 1 mark. If you count the sentences, however, it will often be more, because some sentences are also marking instructions.
This should also hold for C, where you also start with 0, and get marks for everything that is correct.
For A & B, it is different - you are looking at the deductions. For A and B, you start with 100 marks for the perfect solution, and lose marks for every deviation from their perfect answer.
Hi Pete, do you know if EQEs allow you to be a registered European Design attorney too.
ReplyDeleteAs an employee representative:
Deletehttps://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/representatives#:~:text=A%20new%20representative%20can%20be,practitioner%20or%20an%20employee%20representative.&text=A%20legal%20practitioner%20must%20be,business%20in%20the%20European%20Union.
https://guidelines.euipo.europa.eu/1803468/1787678/trade-mark-guidelines/2-4-representation-by-an-employee
You need to satisfy the domicile requirement within EEA and you need to be employed by the employer within EEA.
There is not a direct route. Many national patent attorney qualifications which include Designs & Trademarks allow you to register with the EUIPO and to get on the list.
DeleteIt would therefore only be possible if your national trademark/designs office allowed representation based upon the EQE. You could then argue that the national qualification should be recognised.
I don't understand why the European states traditionally separate patent qualifications from TM/Designs. Protection using designs is much closer to patents than to trademarks, so it would be better that all patent attorneys do it.
I always recommend design protection when the final design is ready - it is relatively quick, relatively cheap, and is much easier to enforce against copy-cats than a patent.
Have a look here: https://guidelines.euipo.europa.eu/1935303/1983609/trade-mark-guidelines/annex-1 - I don't know why it says "Obsolete" (maybe a change of an entry for some country). If you see in the right column "Entitlement is conditional upon possession of a special professional qualification" next to, in the middle column, the national title "Patentanwalt" (for DE or AT) or a similar expression in the national language of the country, then your national institution should be able to sign the entitlement document for you, subject to you holding the national title.
DeleteP.S.: there is a second list: https://guidelines.euipo.europa.eu/1935303/1982391/trade-mark-guidelines/annex-2 - in this list, there are countries, where design representation entitlement is separate from trademarks.
DeleteEQE 2023 Stats are out. In 2018, paper D pass rate was just above 30 percent. Similar rate in 2023. I'm sorry for re-sitters who wrote paper D this year.
ReplyDeleteI didn't find paper D particular hard and not a bad feeling but still failed. I wonder whether the marking was very strict this year and why.
DeleteI also thought it was comparable to previous years - the D2 was too long, and there was a difficult D1 PCT question (Q5), but that would not normally have much of an effect because the marking would normally compensate to allow average candidate to pass.
DeleteThe D (like the C) are positive marks exams, where you start with 0, and get marks for everything that is correct. So, normally, if you are well-prepared and you divide your time, one or two difficult parts
The Examiners Report on page 1 seems to suggest that legal basis was missing or incomplete in very many cases (and more than usual). They claim that the standard of the candidates has dropped dramatically. From looking at some candidate answers, and the comments on some of the questions in the Report, it seems that they have raised the bar during the marking of what is needed to get all the legal basis marks, such as requiring all the relevant paragraphs in a citation.
It also seems as if the Guidelines references were required for full marks in questions 1 and 5, which I don't remember being required in the past, because Guidelines are not legal basis. Guidelines include parts from OJEPO's, case law, and sometimes EPO best practices.
Legal basis = pct/epc articles, pct/epc rules, case law (mostly G decisions). Guideline references that refer to sections which cite the legal basis have usually accepted as alternatives in the past.