The results for EQE2018 are in!!!
The results are in!!!
The list of scores for each EQEreg-number can be found here (via EQE Results and Statistics).
For the various paper, pass, compensable fail and fail rates are:
A: 52%, 11%, 38% (992 candidates)
B: 73%, 7%, 20% (804 candidates)
C: 47%, 12%, 42% (1077 candidates)
D: 33%, 12%, 55% (1123 candidates)
The Examiner's Reports are not yet available (29 June, 17:00).
Update 5 July 19:30: the Examiners Reports are now available on the EQE Compendium pages.
Roel, Joeri
The list of scores for each EQEreg-number can be found here (via EQE Results and Statistics).
For the various paper, pass, compensable fail and fail rates are:
A: 52%, 11%, 38% (992 candidates)
B: 73%, 7%, 20% (804 candidates)
C: 47%, 12%, 42% (1077 candidates)
D: 33%, 12%, 55% (1123 candidates)
Update 5 July 19:30: the Examiners Reports are now available on the EQE Compendium pages.
Roel, Joeri
SHARE:
D results are shocking, it’s a joke!
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to the paper C examiner's comments. A bloke walking a cow through a river being novelty destroying for claim 4. Bah.
ReplyDeleteCongratulations to all who passed. Commiserations to everyone else, but don't give up!
Better results and statistics at http://statisteqe.beetz.nl/ . Ok, maybe not better results, but easier to find and with bronze, silver and gold awards for the best and the brightest.
ReplyDeleteThe top paper D candidate this year appears to have only gotten a silver!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThanks. Huge bug. Only came to the surface because of the relatively low D-scores. But all of the other awards were also slightly off. Solved now
DeleteThought it was unlikely that I wasn't in the top 25% for paper D - rather modest mark of 62, but that seemed to be enough in a difficult year!
DeleteHas the bug been fixed? Previously I wasn't in any top percentiles and now the stats show me in the top 25% for A and D. Yet I only scored 58 in D. So that can't be right... can it?
DeleteI think, previously, the top percentiles were across all examination years? I belive they have been corrected to refer to only the current examination year.
DeleteThe scores in D were (on average) particularly low this year - only 33% of people actually passed it without compensation. To be in the top 25% with 58 shouldn't therefore be a surprise!
I agree. I got a 53 and a bronze metal as well!
DeleteTati
It was even worse than what was suggested at 13:26. I first calculated who had the 25% score in a particular year. If that was number 250, you needed one of the best 250 scores over all years for bronze. With every additional year that would become more difficult.
DeleteIt's the first year. Bugs were to be expected. Thanks for testing and reporting :)
It seems there is still a bug. I have
Delete2 compensable fails
2 passes
total score: 204
A: 46. B: 46, C:61, D:51
This should be passed, but the homepage tells me I have not fully passed the EQE.
Congrats Tom 709600. You've now passed the exam. Due to a typing error, compensation didn't work if you scored < 50 for B. Fixed
DeleteThis bug affected 4 out of 5288 candidates. That's the kind of beta-testers I need :)
DeleteWhere is this homepage that tells you whether you have passed or not? I thought only the results with the eqe numbers were out. I passed with two compensable fails so it would be nice to see it written that I passed.
DeleteA 46, B 46, C 62, D 51 I assume I have passed or am I wrong?
ReplyDeleteBest
Tom
Congrats!
DeleteThx - nevertheless in my opinion the D Part was unfair in 2018 which is reflected in the numbers above.
DeleteAgree! World of difference vs 2017, galaxy of difference vs 2015. Exam commitee does not have any control over the dufficulty level it seems. Consistenxy should be the main design parameter, as it relates 1:1 to fairness, equal chances, equal treatment, equal value of passing.
DeleteYou got more than 200 marks, you did pass two papers with the grad PASS, the other being Compensable FAIL.
DeleteThus, congrats! (R. 6(4) Regulation on the European
qualifying examination for
professional representatives , Supplementary publication 2 –
OJ EPO 2017)!
if you get 46 in one exam and fail the rest, do you still need to repeat that exam you received 46 in, thanks.
ReplyDeleteREE + IPREE
DeleteIf you donot get (enough) compensation from the other papers: Yes. Eg, if next year you score 50, 50 and 53 on the other three: you have only 199 on Total then, so not enough to pass, and can only sit the current 46 paper - you cannot resit papers that you passed.
DeleteIn that situation, could the candidate choose to resit one of the other three papers?
DeleteNo
DeleteSee above
DeleteSome nice graphs here as well, with some comments on the results and papers: https://saltedpatent.blogspot.com/2018/06/congratulations-to-those-who-passed-eqe.html
ReplyDeletePredictably bad results in paper D given the difficulty of this years paper
ReplyDeleteI am surprised about my score. I got lost completely in that appeal stuff in DII during the exam, but my score is quite good: anyone know whether they were very tolerant with that strange appeal question?
DeleteI do not underatsnd why the exam reports are not yet published (as usual)!?
ReplyDeleteExaminer's Reports don't tend to be released for a week or so after the mass release of results. That was certainly the case last year.
Deletethanks. I am curious to see how our Exam commitee would interprete A5 in C report:-) It will be a premiere in patent field.
DeleteThe Examiner's Reports are available now on the EQE compendium pages
DeleteDoes anyone know how accurate the published results are? Has there ever been a case of someone receiving different marks in their results letter?
ReplyDeleteStatistics on EQE Results are out as well.
ReplyDeletehttp://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponot.nsf/0/0b8d505a36857acec12582be00435344/$FILE/StatisticsEQE2018.pdf
Paper D Stats makes for interesting reading, especially pass rates for different nationalities. They seems to be a (bigger than usual) gap between GB/NL examinees and FR/DE examinees.
61.80/57.14 vs. 36.84/24.88(!)
Seems to have been a big difference between the languages in which you sat paper D (I am assuming NL tend to use the EN paper) and pass mark. Any thoughts as to why this was?
very interesting (pass rate for DE is < 0.5 pass rate for GB/NL) and it shows how unfair the results are. I have noticed that as well for the past papers. In my view, one explantion would be that the DE/FR papers are corrected in a computer like way, where the text is scanned for spoting keywords of the answer and not read/interpreted to understand the reasoning behind it. E.g. for the DII part marks: if you write the correct answer but under a given item (because you think that it fits better under that item) you would not get marks for it if the official response suggests to put that answer under item x. Inother terms, you are considered not "fit to practice" if you write answers in a structure different from what is suggested in the exam answer!!
ReplyDeleteAnother noticed point if the language in which you sat is different from the language of the examination center's country (which is an EPO language) it would make difference.
Don't think that's true at all. Just think English candidates go in better prepared. Also I sat the papers in English in Munich and got a really high mark on paper D, so don't think that's the case.
DeleteUK finals papers are considerably harder than EQEs. Most British candidates have sat UK finals prior to sitting the EQEs - so generally are in a decent shape even prior to starting EP revision. I think this goes some way to explaining why GB candidates consistently outperform their FR and DE counterparts.
DeleteImagine what pass % those DE/FR candidates would get on an average UK P6 finals paper!
DeleteUK and NL candidates go better prepared I guess? Both countries have quite difficult national exams I was told, so that is probably a step-up? I think I heard someome say that the Exam Committees already warned the Germans a few years ago that they were doing worse and worse the ast few years, and that was blamed to the training budgets in Germany. Lots of speculation? Or clear facts?
DeleteCan I submit the request for entry on the list of professional representatives before the EPO immediately or do I have to wait for the official letter? Summons to oral proceedings are already scheduled.
ReplyDeleteI wondered that - I've not got oral proceedings, but for other reasons want to go on the register ASAP. I've sent it off - figured the worst they can do is sit on my application or get me to send another application in. May as well give it a go.
DeleteI'd be interested to hear a proper answer to this question.
Looks like last year there was an email sent out about registering (see comments of http://eqe-deltapatents.blogspot.com/2017/06/results-eqe-main-exam-2017-are-out.html)
DeleteI assume the same will be done this year.
Nobody forbids you to start the registration by sending the documents. The form requires you indicate the year you have passed the Exam, there is no mention of the Official letter.
DeleteLikely, you will receive the Offical letter more or less when they receive your documents. You will be registered the day they will receive the complete documentation.
If oral proceeding are already scheduled, I suggest you to inform the Secretariat so that they will timely process your request and inform the Board in order to avoid confusion/problems the day of OP.
The form tells you what to do if you have oral proceedings:
DeleteIf oral proceedings are already scheduled, to ensure faster processing of your request please send a copy of your summons
by fax or e-mail (in pdf format to legaldivision@epo.org, subject: "Oral proceedings on DD.MM.YYYY")
Form available here: https://www.epo.org/applying/online-services/representatives/request.html
You just need to provide proof of nationality and place of business
There is nothing about the results letter on the form: it only asks for the year of qualification. I submitted it along with the nationality and employment evidence. As Anon @ 17:34 says, may as well give it a go.
I also gave it go for UK qualification (missed UK drafting, got all 4 EPs) - but they have asked me to send in the results letter - fair enough!
DeleteWhat would be the results without additional 30 minutes? Something like 20% pass rate? Clearly, the Examination Committee sabotaged the decision of the Supervisory Board, and drastically increased the difficulty level.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean with "sabotaged"? That they were stull required to design it as a 5 hour paper (REE did not change), as the 30 minutes extra was just a "gift" from the Supervisory Board? I agree with you: the D paper resembled an old-style DII more than the DIIs sincc 2013, in style as well as in time needed!!!
DeleteK
Examiners' Reports are out.
ReplyDeleteThis is taking forever... hopefully we will get our letters and be on the register soon. Not sure I understand how this takes 3 weeks+ from results being available.
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to wait until the letter arrives to apply for entry, I was added to the list July 16 (although I am still waiting for the result letter and the letter confirming that I have been added to the list)
DeleteAnyone else still waiting for their letter?
ReplyDeleteI am still waiting. It might have arrived two days ago at my local postal office, but I am not able to check right now and I will have to wait until Monday. I live in Greece...
DeleteAppealing C 2018 based on claim 3 obviousness using A4 + A2 - if anyone wants to discuss: eqe-appeal(at)gmx.net
ReplyDeleteAre there any plans on appealing paper D?
ReplyDeleteThe "Tutors' Report on the EQE 2018 Papers", reporting about the meeting between EQE tutors and the Examination Committees on 18 October 2018 (organized by the European Patent Academy and the epi), has been published in edition 04/2018 of epi Information.
ReplyDeleteSee:
https://information.patentepi.com/issue-4-2018/tutors-report-on-the-eqe-2018-papers.html or
https://information.patentepi.com/uploads/pdf/epi-Information-04-2018.pdf, page 26