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.

Indexed EPO-EPC Guidelines (Mar 22) & Unitary Patent now available to order (EN)

For the order links, see: fireballpatents.com/study-materials

The EPO-EPC Guidelines for Examination detail the procedure to be followed before the EPO. It explains how the EPO implements the EPC, and covers their standard approach when dealing with the direct EP and Euro-PCT applications. These documented practices are based on standard interpretations of the law, internal policies and established case law, and can be used to predict the most likely objections and outcomes in a particular case. 

EPO practices are continuously updated, and once per year, the Guidelines are updated to reflect recent OJEPO's, G-decisions, J-decisions and selected T decisions. These EPO-EPC Guidelines (Mar 22) are expected to be legally valid from 1 Mar 22 to 28 Feb 23. 

We have also included the EPO's Unitary Patent Guide (Apr 22), which outlines how to obtain an EU Unitary Patent. The Unitary Patent is not yet in force, but it is expected to commence in early 2023. 

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.

This book is suitable as a desktop reference for everyday use by attorneys and administrators. This is the most used reference for real life cases. We have retained the original order and numbering of the sections, so it can also be used with any EPC legal reference, such as EPC.App. 

It is also suitable for anyone studying European Patent Law and exam candidates. Exam candidates need to learn how the Guidelines are organised, what they contain (i.e. mainly EPO procedures, some substantive law) and how to find sections quickly. 

For EQE candidates, the EPO-EPC Guidelines are needed for each exam, and are considered essential for Pre-Exam and Paper D. The Guidelines are not legal basis themselves, but most of the EPC legal questions can be answered using the contents. However, answers should always be supported by Articles and Rules citations. The Mar 22 version is the official version for EQE 2023 Main Exam & Pre-Exam. Note that the Unitary Patent is not yet tested at the EQE.

Three editions in English are available (all have 532 pages):

1. Portable A4 Edition - using thinner 50gr "bible paper" to reduce the thickness to 17mm and the weight to 825g.
2. Study A4 Edition - using thicker 80gr paper, which is more suitable for intensive tabbing, annotating and highlighting. It is 28mm thick and weighs 1375g.
3. Study Letter Edition - also using thicker paper, but made available through Amazon mainly for orders outside the EU (AU, CA, JP, UK, US). It is 31mm thick and weighs 1550g.

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

EPO as a PCT Authority (31 Oct 21) now available to order

EPO as a PCT Authority collects and organises the implementation details when the EPO operates under PCT It covers PCT filing (RO), search (ISA, SISA), and examination (IPEA) before the EPO. It also covers PCT-Direct, Supplementary PCT Search, regional entry into the European phase (DO/EO), and formalities after EP entry.

It is useful for daily practice by those dealing with the EPO. It also includes references considered essential for EQE exam candidates. 

It includes Indexed Versions of PCT-relevant Guidelines:

• Euro-PCT Guide (EPG) - 1 Jan 21
• EPO-PCT Guidelines (GL/PCT-EPO) - 1 Mar 21
• EPO Guidelines (GL/EPO) – PCT part only (Ch. E-IX) - 1 Mar 21

Our Indexed Versions improves on the official version by grouping the index entries at the front and abbreviating entries to allow quick scanning, using page numbers to speed up getting to the correct page, indicating sections with significant changes in the last 3 years, including the complete official sources, retaining the original paragraph structure and the underlining of the legal citations, and modifying the contents to fully use the page size, giving better overviews of paragraphs.

It also includes:

• Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) and Validation procedures
• OJEPO Decisions, Fees & Reductions for PCT
• PCT Annexes for EPO as RO / (S)ISA / IPEA / DO-EO
• PCT Applicant Forms & EP Entry Form 1200
• Examples of PCT-related EPO communications

This version reflects the legal status on 31 Oct 21, so it is the official version for EQE 2022 Main Exam & Pre-Exam. See this post for comments on which legal texts to use. Note that answers at the EQE based on EPG and EPO-PCT Guidelines should be supported by EPC Articles, Rules, GL/EPO Guidelines (IPREE R.22) citations.

New this year is the A4-format (210 x 297mm) created by Ignacio Lobato, which reduces the page count. We now offer two versions, both with black and white contents:

1) Portable Edition - 17mm thick, using thinner 50gr "bible paper" to reduce the thickness and the weight to 750gr.

2) Study Edition - using thicker 80gr paper, which is more suitable for intensive tabbing, annotating and highlighting. It is 26mm thick and weighs 1250 gr.

We have also extended the details on Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH), added translation details to the EPC state overview, and extended the details on validation (including procedural flowcharts). Some of these EPO-specific details have been moved from the PCT Global Reference book.

The National Law & Validation book will no longer be produced. Access to www.epo.org during the exam will be available through External References, and online is the quickest way to find the required up-to-date National Law details. I have also moved the Validation details to EPO as a PCT Authority.

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

Indexed EPO-EPC Guidelines (1 Mar 21) now available to order

The EPO-EPC Guidelines for Examination (www.epo.org) covers EPO procedures during filing, search, examination, grant & opposition of EPC applications filed at EPO. Entry of PCT applications into the EP phase is also briefly covered.

This Indexed Version includes the complete official GL/EPO (EPO/EPC Guidelines), which are considered essential for exam candidates, and for professionals dealing with European patent applications in their daily life.

This version is valid from 1 Mar 2021 to 28 Feb 2022. It is the official version for EQE 2022 Main Exam & Pre-Exam. See this post for comments on which legal texts to use.

Note that answers at the EQE based on EPO-EPC Guidelines should be supported by EPC Articles, Rules, GL/EPO Guidelines (IPREE R.22) citations.

Our Indexed Version improves on the official version by:

• grouping the index entries at the front and abbreviating entries to allow quick scanning
• using page numbers to speed up getting to the correct page
• indicating sections with significant changes in the last 3 years
• including the complete official sources, and retaining the original paragraph structure and the underlining of the legal citations
• modifying the contents to fully use the page size, giving better overviews of paragraphs

New this year is the A4-format (210 x 297mm) created by Ignacio Lobato, which reduces the page count from 990 pages to 488. We now offer two versions, both with black and white contents:

1) Portable Edition - 16mm thick, using thinner 50gr "bible paper" to reduce the thickness to 26mm and the weight to 800gr.

2) Study Edition - using thicker 80gr paper, which is more suitable for intensive tabbing, annotating and highlighting. It is 26mm thick and weighs 1250 gr.

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

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

Lessons learned from e-EQE 2021 and looking to the future

Updated 18 Apr 2021: see also my post commenting on the epi discussion paper.

Updated 12 Apr 2021.

"It is only when the tide goes out that you see who's been swimming naked"

I already posted these comments on LinkedIn - this post gives a little more background. There was an enormous effort behind the EQE scenes, and a lot of people working many extra hours, but this could not prevent cracks appearing. 

On reflection, I think a few long-standing EQE issues may have played a role in creating the problems:

• No effective communication with most candidates. Email is fine for sending standard messages, but there is little chance to request additional information. It is not always clear whether candidates actually receive them and understand the intention behind the emails.  A lot of candidates are surprised by changes in exam formats as not everyone prepares using a tutor, or with other students to discuss things.  
• Secrecy and little transparency about every aspect of the exam and organization. Seen particularly by candidates who fail - it is very difficult to figure out where marks were missed, why the official answer was preferred, what alternatives were available etc. But this year, it was promised that the exams had been adapted to take into account the new format, but it was refused to provide any details as this was related to the content of the exams.
• Just enough volunteers to make and mark the exams. No one expects perfection -  limited resources means that not everything can be addressed. But it is a professional exam, so it should be possible with sufficient preparation to have a reasonable expectation of passing. There is a minimum level that should always be achieved.
• Few real limits for each paper in what can be asked. A real problem for many candidates is the habit of regularly introducing new things not announced before or tested before. It is unheard of in any other professional exam not to have an official detailed syllabus of what you need to know, both for the legal parts and the practical subjects. The REE is too vague to be useful, so candidates prepare based on unofficial study guides (like CEIPI or EQE Guide for Preparation) and doing old exams. There is still no clear distinction between legal subjects tested at Pre-Exam level and Main Exam level.
  And it is ridiculous that every year candidates need to have 2000 pages from the WIPO in case a question is asked about a PCT state (in many years, the WIPO and National Law are not needed at all).
• Few real limits for each paper in length and style. Since 2017, an extra 30 mins was added to each Main Exam so that non-native speakers have more time. But there is no clear way in which this is enforced, and it is clear that the time has been eaten up by the exams. 
• No effective way to assist those with En/Fr/Ge as a 2nd language. Non-native speakers have a clear disadvantage. The patent attorney terminology manuals are very useful, but reading/typing exams can still be slower. And giving everyone an extra 30 mins has now lost its effect.

Normally, these are compensated by a lot of flexibility in the marking, and that will be repeated this year. So, anyone well-prepared who generated a reasonable answer has a good chance (as in all other years). But moving forward, some suggestions of possible improvements:

• Make e-EQE improvements highly visible, so that candidates know what to expect (platform + content) and can properly prepare. 
• Using the new possibilities, better define the content to be tested and make sure it is relevant to daily work. 
• Have a proper official syllabus for each exam - articles and rules, sections of Guidelines, case law, OJEPO's. 
• Limit detailed PCT questions outside Europe to IP5 countries, and provide resources electronically.
• Remove overlap in testing and preparation (candidates & committees). For example:
• Pre-Exam: limit to only only legal questions, covering procedural and substantive law. Drop Claims Analysis (covered extensively in A, B, C). Use a mix of multiple choice and "D1"-style questions to test D1 level of knowledge. This is main test of legal knowledge.
• Allow ME: A and ME: B to be taken anytime - either with Pre-Exam or Main Exam. These are practically oriented, relating to skills which are being developed early (drafting and amendment).
• ME: A can be cut in half => reduce subject matter, focus mainly on independent claims,  provide less prior art.
• ME: B is ridiculous with client giving you claims. Go back to old format, cut in half => reduced subject matter, only include a few claims, provide less prior art.
• ME: D - limit to current D2 (D1 is now in Pre-Exam). But also include some basic trademarks/designs and basic trade secrets. Test legal concepts, and not substantive patent law (or greatly simplified substantive law).
  Expand basic foreign knowledge (JP, US) to include CN, KR (IP5). Also define clearly what you need to know. Possibly also test something about those foreign national patent systems. Knowledge of DE, FR and UK systems would also be useful.
• ME: C has much repetition in attacks. Cut in half => fewer claims, provide a lot fewer documents. There should also be a proper infringement part in EQE - it makes most sense to add it here as technical understanding is important.

Perhaps also look even wider, putting the EQE in a broader perspective. A lot of effort is put into only passing candidates who are fit to practice, but there are many other people who interact with the EPO at different levels:

• Permanent education required for qualified attorneys. For most, a lot of the knowledge is lost within a few months of taking their last exam. I know there were some attempts in the past to introduce this, and I know that no system is perfect, but something must be better than nothing. This would also address the issue of the varying knowledge levels of grandfathers \ grandmothers.
• European formalities officer qualification. These are the people who have the most up-to-date procedural knowledge in the offices, but the levels of knowledge vary wildly. 
• European patent agent qualification. Similar to US, where a basic knowledge of procedural and substantive law needed for those interacting with the patent office. This would be useful for people who do not wish to become patent attorneys (yet), or work in a company's patent department, or work in a lawyer's office.

Jetzt neu: indizierte EPÜ-Richtlinien des EPA – 1 Nov. 2019 auf Deutsch

Thanks to Dr. Marc Loschonsky for getting this ready - the 1 Nov 2019 version of our Indexed Guidelines is now available to order in German. 

Sorry it is late for EQE 2020 - it is a lot of work to get the first version ready. In future years, we expect it to be ready about the same time as the English version.

See here the comments about using it at EQE 2020.

It is also suitable for daily life, and for those studying for EQE 2021 (Main Exam or Pre-Exam).

It is 3.2cm x 16x23cm pages, 982 pages, 930g, and printed on the thin 50-gr bible paper.

Which version of the EPO and EPO-PCT Guidelines to use for EQE 2020?

** See amended advice here: EQE 2021 - which legal texts to use? ** 

The syllabus is defined in Regulation on EQE (REE) A.13 and IPREE R.2 and R.22 (latest: OJEPO 2019,SE2). R.22 specifies that legal texts valid on 31 Oct in the year before the exam are relevant. This cut-off was intended to simplify EQE preparation, as the new versions of the EPO Guidelines (Guidelines for Examination in the EPO) and the EPO-PCT Guidelines (Guidelines for Search & Examination at EPO as PCT Authority) only enter into force on 1 Nov each year. So the "older" versions, published 18 months before the EQE, are the official ones.
In practice, the choice is more complicated - for your daily work, you need to be familiar with the most up-to-date versions, and preparing for the Pre-Exam and Main Exam are done in consecutive years, meaning that you may have to consider at least three versions. The EPO Guidelines may also be relevant for any paper, not just the legal part.

Option 1: use "older" (official) versions
- the versions valid on 31 Oct 2019, published on 1 Nov 2018.
- this seems straightforward, but OJEPO publications and legal changes between 1 Nov 2018 and 31 Oct 2019 still need to be monitored.
- also look through the changes made in the 1 Nov 2019 "newer" versions, as most of these are based on changes known in early 2019
- this is the version expected by the Examination Committees when a EPO or EPO-PCT Guideline reference is given


Option 2: use "newer" versions
- the versions which will still be valid on 31 Oct 2020, published on 1 Nov 2019 (note that these will be the official versions for EQE 2021).
- OJEPO publications and legal changes between approx. Apr 2019 and 31 Oct 2019 still need to be monitored as not everything may have been amended in the Guidelines. But there is less chance of missing anything.
- this is less preferred by the Examination Committees, but candidates are not penalized for using a newer version (this was confirmed at the Tutor's Meeting in October 2019), but the version (year) should be indicated at least once for each paper.

Conclusion:
- both options can be equally successful. 95% of the Guidelines are unchanged, and if you know them inside out, you will be able to answer most EPC-related questions.
- if you mark up your Guidelines, it is probably makes sense to use option 1 for the Pre-Exam and option 2 (same version) for the Main Exam one year later.

Reference books:
I have Indexed versions available here, which are compact in size, and simplify and speed up finding things. The index also indicates major updates made in the last 3 years:
- Indexed EPO Guidelines - "older" version (1 Nov 2018 - EN) or "newer" version (1 Nov 2019 - EN/DE)
- EPO as PCT Authority - "older" version (1 Oct 2019) or "newer" version (1 Nov 2019)
--- this is a new reference book, which includes indexed versions of the EPO-PCT Guidelines and Euro-PCT Guide (EPG).

Indexed EPO Guidelines (1 Nov 2018) now available to order

The EPO no longer makes the Guidelines available on paper. So you have to print out the 960 pages, and put it into a binder.

My version is printed on 50g A5 paper - a convenient format as a desktop reference, to take to oral proceedings, or to take to the EQE.

Update (17/1/19): the thin paper is noe available for new orders.

On paper, the Guidelines have never been easy to use. This version improves on the official version by:
- providing a single Detailed Table of Contents at the front (instead of per part), to quickly scan the paragraphs
- using page numbers
- indicating sections with a major amendment in the last 3 years

Legal citations & references are underlined, making them easier to spot.

Indexed EPO Guidelines (1 Nov 2017) now available to order

Recently, the EPO announced that it would no longer make the Guidelines for Examination available on paper. Although the electronic version is useful for searching, some people still  prefer to use a paper version, particularly when studying.

My version is available to order as an A5-sized book. It is suitable as a desktop reference for everyday use, or to take to the EQE.

It includes my own 33-page Detailed Contents:

• abbreviated titles for all sections - in almost all cases, a single line, so that you can scan through the contents faster
• the contents for all sections are combined into one section at the front - this makes it easier to scan to find sections you are looking for, without having to first guess which part it might be in 
• both the conventional section numbers and page numbers are given next to each title, speeding up finding the right page
• sections indicated that have undergone a major amendment in the last 3 years, so you can identify possible EQE questions

It is lighter (690g) and smaller (21 x 14 x 2.8cm with 880 pages) than the official paper copy that used to be available. Note that the paper used is thin - 50 gr/m2 - to keep the size and weight low.

In comparison, the Visser book weighs 1220 g and is slightly bigger (24 x 16 3.6 cm with 950 pages).