Friday, 20 December 2019

Tutor's Report EQE2019

The "Tutors‘ Report on the EQE 2019 Papers and the Meeting between Tutors and EQE Committees" by N. Cordes (NL), L. Ferreira (PT), A. Hards (DE), K. Hartvichova (CZ), H. Marsman (NL), S. van Rijnswou (NL), and R. van Woudenberg (NL) has been published in epi Information 4/2019.

See here for pdf (page 40 ff) and html versions.

1 comment:

  1. The Report for B states "In Rule 24 of the IPREE, it is indicated that the candidate has to respond to all points raised in the official communication. A contrario, if there is no objection of non-unity raised, you do not need to address the issue of unity-of-invention".

    Still, the Rule 24(3) states "Candidates are expected to respond to all points raised in the official communication. The response shall be in the form of a letter to the EPO accompanied by the claims supplied by the client, amended as appropriate to meet the requirements of the EPC",
    i.e.
    not "... to meet those requirements of the EPC, which were mentioned in the official communication" !)

    Also, the client instructed "Please make any amendments to these claims that you consider necessary to meet the requirements of the EPC, without adding further dependent claims",
    i.e.
    not "... to meet those requirements of the EPC, which were mentioned in the official Communication" !).

    Even worse, in previous papers the Examination Board required to improve dependencies of the dependent claims despite that there was no any mention of this in the Rule or instructions from the client!

    The Examination Board just capriciously changes the rules of the exam, without even warning anyone :(

    ReplyDelete