Calendars for EPAC 2023 & EQE 2024

Up-to-date exam calendars can be downloaded here. Please pass on quickly to any EPAC candidates – the exam will be held on 12 Oct 2023. We have also included a summary about the changes to the EPO’s 10-day notification rules because this is likely to be tested.

Calendars are no longer provided during the exam. Although the OJEPO’s are available online, there is no digital calendar to figure out weekends, and you cannot use one on your computer (or phone) during the exam. So, you need them on paper.

• For EPAC 2023, there is no clear info, but we expect that the weekends and closing days for EPO offices in 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 will be sufficient.
• For EQE 2024, you need to know the weekends and closing days for EPO offices in 2022, 2023 and 2024. The EQE Supervisory Board decided on 26 Jun 23 that the default Rules 126, 127 and 131 EPC to be applied are those in force on 1 Nov 23 (no 10-day rule). If candidates choose to apply Rules 126, 127 and 131 EPC as in force on 31 Oct 23 (10-day rule), this must be clearly indicated in their answers.

Indexed: PCT App. Guides / EPC Guidelines / UP Guide

The latest version of our Indexed WIPO-PCT Applicant's Guides (Jul 23) is now available. Together with our EPO-EPC Guidelines (Mar 23) and Unitary Patent Guide (Apr 22 = still in force), these books are useful as desktop references for daily use and for EQE study.

Our Indexed version improves on the official digital versions by abbreviating index entries, grouping them at the front to allow quick scanning, using page numbers to speed up finding pages, indicating sections with significant changes in the last 3 years, and fully using the page size to give a better overview of paragraphs. Relevant legal citations & references are underlined, making them easier to spot. We have retained the original order and numbering of the sections so they can also be used with any EPC / PCT legal reference, such as EPC.App and PCT.App.

Three editions of each are available in English:

• Study A4 Edition - using thicker 80gr paper, which is more suitable for intensive tabbing, annotating and highlighting available from Pumbo via www.boekenbestellen.nl.
• Portable A4 Edition - using thinner 50gr "bible paper", which is thinner and lighter available from available from Pumbo via www.boekenbestellen.nl. Note that Printing-On-Demand on such thin paper can sometimes result in minor print quality issues.
• Study Letter Edition - using thicker 90gr paper, which is more suitable for intensive tabbing, annotating and highlighting available internationally from Amazon mainly for orders outside the EU (AU, CA, JP, UK, US). If you are within Europe, please support our highly-recommended printer Pumbo instead of using Amazon👍.

For more details, including the order links, and sample pages, see: fireballpatents.com/study-materials.

The EPO-EPC Guidelines (EPC-GL) detail the procedures to be followed before the EPO. It covers their standard approach when dealing with direct EP and Euro-PCT applications, based on standard interpretations of the law and established case law. This book DOES NOT contain the EPO Euro-PCT Guide (EPG) or the EPO-PCT Guidelines.
This book also contains the EPO's Unitary Patent Guide (UPG), which outlines how to obtain an EU Unitary Patent. Note that the Unitary Patent is part of the legal syllabus for EQE2024:

"The syllabus of the EQE includes all updates and publications as defined in Rule 22 IPREE as at the syllabus cut-off date (31 October of the year preceding the examination). This includes inter alia, OJ EPO 2022, A41, which sets out the "Implementing Regulations on Unitary Patent Protection" before the EPO"

The WIPO-PCT Applicant's Guides (AG-IP and AG-NP) detail the main requirements and actions to be followed before the International Authorities and Designated / Elected Offices by applicant's.
This book also contains the WIPO Administrative Instructions (AI), detailing how Authorities should apply the PCT Rules, and including an overview of the applicant & office forms, the Request and the Demand Forms.
This book also contains Misc. PCT Info which are the useful overviews and FAQ's found on the WIPO website, such as which offices accept restoration of priority, fee tables, fee discounts, national security provisions and national entry time limits. This book DOES NOT contain the RO Guidelines (RO GL or GL/RO) or ISA/IPEA Guidelines (ISPE GL or GL/ISPE).

For EQE candidates, the EPO-EPC Guidelines and WIPO-PCT Applicant's Guides are considered essential for Pre-Exam and Paper D because most of the legal questions can be answered using the contents. Guidelines & Applicant's Guides are not legal basis themselves, but on Paper D, answers should always be supported by Articles and Rules citations. These versions are the official versions for EQE 2024 Main Exam & Pre-Exam. Note that many legal texts will be available digitally during the exam through WISEflow, including the contents of the EPO website and most parts of the PCT Applicants Guides. If you will rely on these electronic versions, make sure during the mocks that you actually have access because some networks and systems may block these connections.

EQE Equality = Missione Impossibile?

 

“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/

Sign up to try the NEW e-EQE

After a lot of work behind the scenes, the EPO and epi have published their extensive proposals for the new e-EQE. There are even mock exams for you to try. And they want your feedback …

The proposal documents are on the New EQE pages of the EPO website. The consultation will run from the second half of May until 15 July 2022. The mock papers will be accessible in WISEflow, but you must sign up separately, even if you already have an account.

The proposal consists of 2 foundation and 4 main modules that gradually progress from acquiring legal and procedural knowledge towards its practical application.

The new format is adapted to online exam taking – the time on the computer during the exams will be shorter, and there is a combination of autoscoring (multiple choice) and open questions. The material that can actually be tested in each exam is therefore reduced, but that is compensated by having a broader range of situations that need to be prepared. These situations have all been explicitly mentioned in the proposal, so you can see exactly what you need to know.

I am already a big fan of M4 (Advising the Client) because it includes:

6. Understand and know infringing activities (in comparative patent law),
   thus being capable of determining the rights conferred by a patent, their duration
   and which acts need to be performed to be able to enforce them.

Feedback can be provided by questionnaire once the mock papers are available. The earliest that these changes could be introduced is EQE 2024. They have already indicated that EQE 2023 will follow the current regulations and formats.

epi online conference - Modernising the EQE - 21 June

8 Jun 21: Forum link added. The epi recently published their discussion paper on proposed changes to the EQE from 2024. See separate post for my comments. It is also possible to post comments on epi -learning on-line forum (open to all).

On 21 June 1300-1600, epi is holding an online conference. We want a broad perspective from all EPC states, so please join and make your opinion heard. Non epi members are also invited to register and participate.

Conference on Modernising the EQE to better test “fitness-to-practise”

21.06.2021

Starts: 21.06.2021   13.00hrs
Ends: 21.06.2021   16.00hrs

Venue

Online conference

---

Description

Moving to a digital testing environment necessitates adaptation of the EQE but also presents an opportunity to review whether the EQE is testing the skills and knowledge required by the European patent attorney of today. The aim of the conference is to explore how to modernise the EQE to better test whether a candidate is ready to practise as an EPA and to help candidates develop the skills and knowledge needed to practise. During the conference, the following topics will be explored: 

• the motivation for change 
• the essential skills and knowledge of an EPA, 
• modernising the structure and timeline of the examination, and 
• any impact on national examinations and other national considerations. 

---

Target group

The conference is aimed at delegates who are involved in training EPAs, including training providers, tutors, mentors and employers as well as those who have an interest in maintaining a high standard of training, including professional organisations and patent offices.

---

Technical requirements

In order to attend the online conference participants need a computer with an internet browser and a high-speed broadband internet connection. For the conference, epi uses Zoom. Security settings on local Firewalls need to be checked. 

To access to the conference epi sends out a link shortly before the conference.

---

Registration

Please note that despite the conference participation being free of charge, the section on billing information in the registration form is mandatory. Unfortunately it is not possible for us to remove that section at the moment.

---

Working language

English

---

Contact

For further information, please contact Jacqueline  Kalbe: education@patentepi.org

---

Minimum number of participants

20*
*If the minimum number of participants was not reached by the registration deadline, the seminar will be cancelled. In this case the epi will inform you immediately.

---

Registration deadline

Registration is open until 14.06.2021. The order of receipt by epi will determine the attendance in case of over-subscription.

(The links below may not work. Alternatively click on link at the bottom of the page or try this one).

---

 Registration epi member/student

Registration non-member

e-EQE – epi discussion paper - comments

Update 21 Jun 21: I have also made some of these points in epi Information 02/21

8 Jun 21: forum link added. The epi recently published their discussion paper on proposed changes to the EQE from 2024. See below for some comments, following on from my earlier comments on the future of the EQE.  It is also possible to discuss using the epi-learning forum (open to all).

My conclusions: 

• Some good ideas, like allowing an earlier start of learning, but I miss any proposals to improve the organisation. 
• I miss a proposal for permanent education - the EQE tests whether a small number of representatives are fit to practice at that moment. 
• I hear more and more candidates choosing to follow a law degree instead of the EQE because of the unpredictability of passing. Having everything modular will help prevent this getting larger.
• But we also need a clear syllabus for each part, transparent marking and a proper way to address the concerns of the average non-native speakers.
• Infringement has to be added - it is an essential part of being a patent attorney.

My comments:

1. Is the current EQE adequately testing the “fit to practice” criterion? - p.1

• Some Exam Papers are ... jigsaw puzzles ... rather than testing real skills ...
• It is not a problem if questions are designed to have one answer - the legal questions are set up like this. Having small puzzles that fit together, like the current Pre-Exam - claim analysis and D2 does mean that you can feel when you are on the right path.
• However, the general advice to pass currently is to not think too much and give the answer in the Guidelines because alternatives are almost never accepted, even if properly argued. Perhaps that way that the questions are structured needs to be clarified - instead of asking, is it novel/inventive/extension etc, you can ask whether the EPO will object (the Guidelines answer) - candidates should know what will happen during proceedings.
• The biggest current "puzzle" is the C exam - it is completely out of control (not just this year). There are too many different documents and the pieces you need are not always in the most likely places. Way too long, too many documents, with a ridiculous amount of detail require for argumentation. 
• The B exam is now going the same way. 
• All papers should start with 0 marks, and award marks for correct parts. A and B suffer the most because they are negatively marked - you start with 100 marks, but lose marks for each deviation from the expected answer. The problem is that by misreading or misunderstanding a couple of things, you end up running out of materials to use. There is a randomness to passing - if you are on the same wavelength, you pass. If not, you fail. But if you retake it a year later, then you can pass without preparing any differently.
• Marking of the practical papers should always consider whether a mistake would be correctable in real-life 
• Why should you be afraid for A of submitting a non-novel claim or non-inventive claim? As the argumentation supplied tends to be brief for A (as it reflects the brief argumentation typically included in a patent application), you should not lose so many marks if a dependent claim is what they wanted. There should be no marks lost for extending a feature beyond the scope of the client's letter, for example.
• For B, where argumentation is required, the reasoning can be judged better for possibly having a non-novel or non-inventive claim. There should be no marks lost for not abandoning scope based on an instruction by the client if you think it is patentable (and argue this). 
• Why is matching EVERY feature and correctly defining closest prior art in C such an issue? For an opposition, the main thing is to attack all the claims, get all the documents in, and argue the non-trivial aspects of the feature matching and inventive step. You would not write an opposition like that.
• Methodology courses - p.1, p.2
• I may be a little biased ;-), but I am not sure why it is a goal to get rid of these. Most of the methodology courses are based on reverse engineering and save candidates a lot of time that they can use for actually practicing papers. I don't think these will disappear, even with a more modular exam and shorter pieces. 
• These are currently "needed" because the exams are much too long (so very difficult to do in the time available, especially for non-native speakers), there is no official info about what is to be tested, how the papers should be made, or how they should be marked. The Examiners' Reports are not easy to read and deliberately leave out a lot of details on alternatives that were accepted, or the exact marking. Even if candidates file an appeal, they will never see the details of their marking to see where they lost marks. 
• If there are tricks that is being taught to pass with little preparation, obviously this should be prevented. But I don't consider pointing out where marks are awarded and how to score those marks as a trick - all marks count equally to the scoring, and candidates should always focus on their strengths and understand what is required. I don't see weak candidates passing just through methodology - more that there are a lot of well-prepared candidates who fail because they do not know how to show their working properly within the time available. Hardly anyone ever gets about 80 marks for certain exams.
• I agree that it should not be necessary to follow such a course to pass. The committees and boards can influence this already => a clear syllabus that they stick to, openness about the marking and what is expected, using similar formats and styles each year, announcing new subjects to be tested or changes to the marking in advance, publishing several alternatives that were accepted, allowed appealing candidates to see exactly where they lost marks etc.
• Practical training
• This varies greatly, depending on where you work and the opportunities available - there should be more guidance on what you should be doing and some help with this. 
• I agree that that it is better to prepare earlier and not make exam participation dependent on a fixed number of years - for example, a lack of drafting and amendment experience can be compensated by doing more old exams to learn the skills needed. You need the knowledge as early as possible.
• Suggestion - allow qualified attorneys, lawyers, employees, formalities officers etc. to also sit the modules (without overwriting their scores) to allow them to stay up to date in a structured way. This could already be done for the Pre-Exam (no consequence - they just get marks separately for legal and claim analysis).

CLICK BELOW FOR MORE COMMENTS