tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post1798165255921008388..comments2024-03-26T18:08:13.873+01:00Comments on DeltaPatents EQE Pre-exam: First impressions Pre-Exam 2015?Nico Cordeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18418422722416402064noreply@blogger.comBlogger89125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-64493997524706997312015-04-07T10:22:32.238+02:002015-04-07T10:22:32.238+02:00Has anyone received their official results letter?...Has anyone received their official results letter? I understand they were dispatched on 27th March, but mine is nowhere to be seen.<br /><br />AnxiousAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-21700050393698138142015-03-02T16:34:39.453+01:002015-03-02T16:34:39.453+01:00When you sit the main exam's paper D next year...When you sit the main exam's paper D next year, you need to be very careful in phrasing your argumentation on validity of priority. Most applications/ patents in the DII part have multiple claims, which usually have different priority dates and different prior art against it - explicitly and specifically discussing the (in-)validity of priority is key in DII.<br />We address this in detail in our D Methodology courses, that we run from September to December at various locations in Europe, in English, -since a few years- German and -new for EQE2016 preparation- French!Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-74733063039881554582015-03-02T16:24:08.421+01:002015-03-02T16:24:08.421+01:00Hi Anonymous (please make yourself known with your...Hi Anonymous (please make yourself known with your name or use a nickname).<br /><br />Why were you confused that the independent claim seemed to be broader than the description? That is quite usual to get the client the broadest possible right by claiming in generic wording and describing one or more specific embodiment(s). Further, there is no room for any dependent claim if the independent claim would correspond to a/one complete embodiment and nothing less than that.<br /><br />Art.123(2) does not apply when considering claims of the application as filed vs the description. It can be a problem under, in particular, Art. 83, Art.84, Art.56 or Art.57 when the claims are too broad - see GL (2014) F-III, 2; F-IV, 4.23; F-IV, 6.1; F-VII, 4.2, second but last paragraph,Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-78701263123580301512015-03-02T16:16:57.473+01:002015-03-02T16:16:57.473+01:00Hi Ela,
Unfortunately we cannot give guarantees, ...Hi Ela,<br /><br />Unfortunately we cannot give guarantees, but you have 4 or more statements margin compared to our answer, so for you to fail, we must have at least 4 errors... But I will postpone my congratulations until the official answers are there! "Never sell the bear before you shot it", we say in Dutch (translated into En).<br />Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-61281940220158952712015-03-02T16:08:11.861+01:002015-03-02T16:08:11.861+01:00Hi Dickens,
Yes and no.
I agree that it was more...Hi Dickens,<br /><br />Yes and no.<br /><br />I agree that it was more difficult than the first three of 2012-2014, which were of similar level.<br /><br />However, the Exam Committee indicated that they were happy with the level of difficulty and expressed that they did not have the intention to make the Pre-Exam more difficult.<br /><br />The Tutor's Report (EQE2013) in epi information indicates: "EC: the difficulty level and the 0/0/1/3/5 marking scheme in 2014 will be the same as in 2013."<br />Also, the Tutor Report (EQE2013) in epi information 4/2014 indicates: "EC indicated that they are happy with the scores. Pass rate was 85%. Pass level will stay at 70 marks."Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-46404638138623905932015-03-02T15:59:24.096+01:002015-03-02T15:59:24.096+01:00Well, did you know what the pass rates were of the...Well, did you know what the pass rates were of the earlier pre-exams?...<br /><br />Any person could have expected it to become more difficult!!!! If not to serve the purpose of requiring candidates to study early, then at least for justifying that the Pre-Exam exists! <br /><br />Dickens<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-69935727348707192612015-03-02T15:56:35.743+01:002015-03-02T15:56:35.743+01:00Hi Caroline,
Please be more specific as to what y...Hi Caroline,<br /><br />Please be more specific as to what you considered very unclear. <br /><br />Although the Pre-Exam can only be answered with True-False per statement, a statement on the blog is not so valuable if not supported by any arguments and/or not specific...Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-26788417637828747802015-03-02T15:52:54.665+01:002015-03-02T15:52:54.665+01:00Hi RIS,
Please be more specific as to WHY you con...Hi RIS,<br /><br />Please be more specific as to WHY you conclude True from this long legal provision.Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-28978926872166630092015-03-02T15:51:31.932+01:002015-03-02T15:51:31.932+01:00Hi Manuel,
If this is the only error (next to goi...Hi Manuel,<br /><br />If this is the only error (next to going wrong with 3.1) you made in the legal part, I would not worry!<br /><br />By the way, what was what you called the veeery stupid mistake in 3.1?Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-45638309945684950372015-03-02T15:49:07.111+01:002015-03-02T15:49:07.111+01:00Hi Alexander,
Did you consider it important? If s...Hi Alexander,<br /><br />Did you consider it important? If so, for which statement(s) and why?<br />Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-41639113773637796512015-03-02T15:45:08.936+01:002015-03-02T15:45:08.936+01:00Hi Roel,
Did you see that statement 19.4 does not...Hi Roel,<br /><br />Did you see that statement 19.4 does not relate to any specific claim!? Only to Claim Set II as a whole (page 27, 1st line).<br /><br />Although I think no candidate considered it not to relate to claim II.2, as 19.1-19.3 all relate to claim II.2.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-54701262526095223202015-03-02T15:41:20.148+01:002015-03-02T15:41:20.148+01:00All claims are used:
Each of the claims of Claim S...All claims are used:<br />Each of the claims of Claim Set I (page 19) is used in one or more statements of questions 13-16.<br />Each of the claims of Claim Set II (page 27) is used in one or more statements of questions 17-20 - the use of claim II.6 is in question 20, feature c). <br />Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-57146854212648695162015-02-26T16:35:37.431+01:002015-02-26T16:35:37.431+01:00Last year, the official results letters were dated...Last year, the official results letters were dated 28 March 2014, at least for the candidates that appealed in cases D3/14, D4/14 - I assume for all.Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-42718542366136509582015-02-26T15:04:51.341+01:002015-02-26T15:04:51.341+01:00Last year, 5 people having 68 or 69 points filed a...Last year, 5 people having 68 or 69 points filed an appeal in view of statement 10.4, where the exam committee had an absolutely wrong answer according to the Displiplinary Board of Appeal - see decisions D2/14, D3/14,D4/14, D5/14, D 6/14 (only D3/13 in Engloish)- and the Board corrected their grade from FAIL to PASS axccordingly.<br /><br />One might well argue that this pre also had a major omission, in the sense that it should have been absolutely unambiguous whether cardboard must have wood fibers (but it lacked such clear definition as some people argued abovve) or whether wood-based cardboard is a specific type of cardboard (genus-species). C papers always have very explicit definitions where needed, or they define explicitly what is common general knowledge - which is a ncesssessary req to an EQE exam paper as the EQE Rules define that candidates can not bring any own knowledge.<br /><br />So, let's see wwhat happens. In my view, the exam committee should not let it come to unnecessatry appeals - and would probably also not want it to come so far again (the Discipl Board was very harsh on them, saying that the exam board should have granted interloocatury revising and not have bothered the Discipl Board with such clear case of them being wrong and the candidates being right.<br />To prevent candiddates worrying whether to appeal or not it would be praised of the exam committee makes their position clear in the examiners answer so that it is directely clear whether appealling is needed. If you need to appeal you need to be careful that you do not have 2 months but only 1 month after notification of your results: Art.108 does not apply, but the REE and IPREE which have their own appeal procedure.<br /><br />I am curious -as well as you Courious 2- to see what happens!<br /><br />WilAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-16458766282497604502015-02-25T11:15:42.282+01:002015-02-25T11:15:42.282+01:00@curious: I'm also really curious regarding ho...@curious: I'm also really curious regarding how many questions will be appealed. I'm pretty sure that the cardboard-questions will trigger appeals. Appeal fee is pretty high, though. I haven't really looked into this kind of appeal: Is it enough to convince them that the question was ambiguous and that both answers are to some extent reasonable? Is there any refund of the appeal fee?Courious 2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-36790137670667500112015-02-25T09:57:46.216+01:002015-02-25T09:57:46.216+01:00This may be a very speculative question, but would...This may be a very speculative question, but would you assume that with 74 points with three (correct) answers on questions where you are not entirely sure I have a reasonable chance of passing?I hate cardboardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-30481886180950097212015-02-25T09:56:31.436+01:002015-02-25T09:56:31.436+01:00@That's it: Are you a patent attorney trainee ...@That's it: Are you a patent attorney trainee and give up now because of the exam or is the EQE for your job merely a bonus (patent attorney in a company, EPO examiner)?<br /><br />Also 65 points might nevertheless be enough. Delta Patents have indicated several times that their answers might not be correct and they "tend to say" T/F. The exam committee might therefore see some points different. <br /><br />And if it is really tight (and you lost points at the "right" ambiguous questions, there is the option of appeal*<br /><br />*I'm curious to see how many questions will be appealedCuriousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-18772358855367290562015-02-25T09:41:53.349+01:002015-02-25T09:41:53.349+01:00In 2014, the results and the Examiner's report...In 2014, the results and the Examiner's report with the official answer became available last week of March and first week of April.Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-50283190818166536812015-02-25T09:39:58.774+01:002015-02-25T09:39:58.774+01:00To That's it:
As you can see on our analysis ...To That's it:<br /><br />As you can see on our analysis on http://pre-exam.blogspot.nl/2014/07/how-did-pre-exam-2013-do-at-main-exam.html, some Pre-Exam 2012 candidates that would have failed now (as they have a score between 50 and 70), passed paper D 2013 or at least got a compensable fail; and the same for Pre-Exam 2013 candidates sitting D 2014.<br />Despite this analysis, of which the figures were also submitted to the Meeting between the committees and the tutors, the pass level was kept 70.<br /><br />See also the "Tutors’ report on the EQE 2014 papers" in epi Information 4/2014, available at http://www.patentepi.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download_area/epi_Information/EPI_Information_03-2014.pdf <br /><br />Unfortunately, as long as you donot pass the Pre-Exam, you do not get an opportunity to pass paper D with the current two-staged EQE system.Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-23792357793986520322015-02-25T09:22:49.154+01:002015-02-25T09:22:49.154+01:00~65 marks. I Would consider myself in a good posit...~65 marks. I Would consider myself in a good position to start studying for D. Yet, I will not... <br />This was the first and last eqe-exam for me. Thanks and good luck to all!That's itnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-78986608158808874932015-02-24T22:54:23.707+01:002015-02-24T22:54:23.707+01:00Many of the legal questions - and in particular Q1...Many of the legal questions - and in particular Q10 - were not that hard if you know the Visser by heart. It was just time consuming to verify all the answers. I wonder what level of stress the real paper D will produce...Visser Rulesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-41316672993392796922015-02-24T18:32:03.343+01:002015-02-24T18:32:03.343+01:00When does the EPO generally publish the expected a...When does the EPO generally publish the expected answers? The correct answers are fixed before the exam, right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-46237779749305773212015-02-24T18:13:32.804+01:002015-02-24T18:13:32.804+01:00@Roel: According to your results, I would have pas...@Roel: According to your results, I would have passed with 78 points.<br /><br />But, this remains to be seens, in particular in view of the uncertainties for some of the claim analysis questions... For now I can only wait and hope for my luck.<br /><br />Imho, the amount of discussion and interpretation possible for some questions (in particular the claim analysis) and also that you guys are not certain about some of the answers point towards some ambiguous questions, which is unfortunate for a multiple choice test.Elanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-39447013815965880162015-02-24T16:49:55.142+01:002015-02-24T16:49:55.142+01:00Our provisional claims analysis answers are now al...Our provisional claims analysis answers are now also available on a separate blog thread!<br /><br />Please post your comments relating to those to the separate blog.Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-584401433841434859.post-2496569121081889792015-02-24T16:12:24.279+01:002015-02-24T16:12:24.279+01:00Claims analysis answers now available! Claims analysis answers now available! Roel van Woudenberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15823355175016282250noreply@blogger.com