Thursday, 17 December 2020

Updated information on Mock 1 - e-EQE platform will go online on 21 December 2020 for candidates - tutors can also get access after registration (via epi)

Today, the e-EQE website has been updated to provide the following information (added information cited in full; somewhat reformatted; emphasis added):

e-EQE – updated information (link)

Candidates will be able to have a first look at the examination system Wiseflow which will be used for the EQE 2021 by means of a mock examination between 22 December 2020 and 28 February 2021 (Mock 1).   [Blog update 22-12-2020: Dates added]

Mock 1 is intended for candidates to test their equipment and get acquainted with the examination environment

Candidates will be able to access the respective mock papers according to their current enrolment to the EQE 2021 papers. 

There will be no proctoring during Mock 1.

If you have any questions about any aspect of the e-EQE, please contact the EQE helpdesk ( We will use your questions as the basis for FAQs, which will be published in due course.

In the meantime, watch this space for updates on the e-EQE.


Also today, the following message was published in the epi website (emphasis added), indicating that:

  • The e-EQE platform will go online on 21 December 2020 for candidates

  • Tutors can also get access after registration (via epi)

Tutors will also be allowed access to the e:EQE system

The e-EQE platform will go online on 21 December 2020. Apart from candidates who are registered for the EQE in March, also tutors will be allowed access to the platform.

If you are a tutor for the EQE and wish to have access to the e:EQE system, you have to register. What is required : first name, family name, email address. Those who request access will then be put in an Excel sheet which will be uploaded by the EPO in the e:EQE system.

Please reply at the latest on Monday 21 December 2020 at 18:00, then you will probably get access before Xmas.

Send your first name, family name, email address to

Cornelis Mulder
Secretary General
epi - European Patent Institute


Please feel invited to share your experiences with the platform as comments to this blog. 
Indicate whether your comment relates to the main system/ a specific (part of a) main exam paper or the pre-exam system/ a specific part of the pre-exam paper.

We allow you to post your comments anonymously, but it is recommended and appreciated if you identify yourself using your true name or a nick name - that makes communication much more pleasant and efficient than talking to "Anonymous 25 December 2020 21:22" and alike. 
Please refer to the "Problems with commenting" link on the top right of this blog page if you have problems with commenting (which may occur due to security settings, cookies, etc, esp when using Captcha with anonymous posts).


  1. I just received an email from the EPO. I must say it's a little late and I doubt many will be able to get the equipment in time before Christmas so it's a good job they have extended.

    Having had a brief look, I must say that it looks very complicated. One set of instructions has 48 pages. The other one has about 20 pages. The burden seems to be heavily placed on candidates.

    1. I agree. There is so much to get through in the documents. This is going to take some effort.

    2. Which "Set of instructions" for your refer to ("One set of instructions has 48 pages. The other one has about 20 pages.").

      The instructions (User Guide Mock 1 / Wiseflow Tutorial /Tips for candidates) on the e-EQE webpage are much shorter.

  2. 3 set of instructions with pages and pages of what to do. It looks mighty complicated and will take a significant amount of time to get used to custom. This all eats up into my revision and preparation time which should be spent revising.

  3. Does it hides your other application. I think there needs to be a timer to tell you how long you have left.

    First impressions - its going to need an awful lot of time and effort to set this up and test.

    Can you set this up on multiple computers because I haven't decided whether to do it in the office or at home yet.

  4. Considering I can't go into the office over christmas, I will need to set this up on my home PC first to test the system. I do hope to sit it in my work office. I assume once it is installed, it can be access on multiple computers as long as you got a user name and password.

  5. I have been very concerned by the significant amount of admin placed on candidates this year and the documents released today has confirmed my worries. Its a substantial read.

  6. If we installed it for the mock, do we have to uninstall it again and reinstall with an updated version of wiseflow for the exam.

  7. This system looks so complex.

  8. This isn't a thorough preparation. I would like to believe that I am handy with the electronic softwares, but this is so much in rush. The hyperlinks within the pdf document titled "User Guide Mock 1" aren't responding/working. EPO could have taken a couple of more days and delivered a well-cooked solution. As a start, they need to quality check the pdf documents they upload and if all the hyperlinks are working.

  9. I still did not understand how they want us to put the camera? Can anyone clarify?

  10. what a bureapolitic work!
    even, NONE of the hyperlink in the pdf file works!

  11. Ladies and gentlemen I present to you a new portion of the EQE: Paper "e". It relates to setting up an entire system to work for taking the test. You have two months to complete it, in addition to Papers A-D. If you fail, you can take paper "e" again next year (maybe).

  12. After a cursory glance through the tutorials, I see several potential issues:
    First of all, it seems that a lot of crucial information is going to be sent to candidates via email, most notably the password you need to log into the exam itself. This will likely be a problem for candidates who want/need to take the exam from home, but have used their work email for the EQE. Typically, you can’t receive your work email on a personal computer or without using a VPN. Add to that the requirement that you have to have admin privileges to install the Lockdown browser, this means, you may have to jump through several more hoops in order to be able to login at all.
    Secondly, the document viewer apparently only allows you to either view documents side-by-side or to open them in separate tabs. Copy/paste functionality is *only* available in the second mode. This should make, in particular, paper C significantly more difficult, since it will require a lot of hopping between tabs.
    Lastly, it seems that the text editor does not offer strike-through, which seems exceedingly weird to me, since this would and should be used extensively in A and B for marking amendments.

    1. I agree - they should build these functionalities in. Why are candidates this year handicapped. They should have the same functionalities as they have on written paper. No excuses - they had a year to design a program that allows candidates to do the same thing as they do on paper.

    2. I don't get it - it will be easier if there is an online portal that we can log in rather than downloading various pieces of software which we don't even know what sort of data they will be collecting in the background. They should be as transparent as possible about this new kit. What will they be monitoring and why.

      Many companies will have security software built into their system and need admin rights for downloads. Even on personal computers, there are many other software installed and security software in place. There are many more hoops to jump through.

    3. Ok, I created my account, and at least the first issue is not a problem: You can add additional e-mail addresses to your profile, so you can set it up so that the system sends the info to your private e-mail address as well.

    4. Where does it says you can do that. in the guide, it says the Exam Sect. will create an account for you.

    5. Once you get the email from the secretariat, you can activate your account. After the account is activated and you are logged in, you can edit your profile (click on the small arrow next to your name on the top right of the screen) and add additional email addresses.

  13. I think a demo video explaining functions of wise flow and installing procedure would have been a great help in this case.
    I quickly went through these manuals and what caught my attention is that you can"t copy text from the exam paper if you have opened it as a floating window by double tapping (option 1) on preview. To copy one should open it as a separate tab (option 2) and in this case this window would not be next to your text editor. This looks rather complex to me.

    1. Yes, I don't understand why the copy and paste function is so complicated. A simple Ctrl C and Crtl V should do it but for some reason, you have to disable all sorts and create new tabs as you've said.

      It seems that they have built a system to make it so much more complicated and time consuming.

  14. I'm not sure I understand. What is the point of testing if they are not testing everything. It said they are not testing the proctoring system. Why?

  15. My fear is that alot of the functionalities are lost with this system.

    No highlighting functions allowed.
    Pasting function is limited.
    No strike-through text allowed. Can we underline our tracked changed claims for A and B papers.
    Would the text editor pick up client "amended changes" when copying and pasting.
    Paper C will be a walking nightmare (scrolling up and down between prior art).

    There is alot of functionalities that candidates often rely on which will not be available for candidates this year. In that sense, candidates this year are at a disadvantage compared to other years.

    1. I agree that the absence of strike-through text among the formatting options makes it clunky to deal with amendments, for example in B. Maybe I'll use bold or italic as a replacement formatting option for strike-through, and indicate that in a headnote.

      About paper C, there's a search function in the pdf editor, that may be more time-efficient than scrolling up and down.

      What I'm more concerned with is the balance between both halves of paper C e.g. one half being loaded with tricky inventive step attacks, while the other half mostly focused on A123(2) and novelty attacks.

  16. I echo with what has been said before - it is going to take a substantial amount of my time to get to grips with this system and this will undoubtedly affect my preparations for the EQEs.

    Can't they find a more simple system. It seems very overburdening with all the requirements that candidates must fulfill. Hasn't the EPI/EPO factored this in at all.

  17. Reading these documents is hefty and confusing. Can anyone tell me why we need a speaker - it seems like we don't need it at all. How is printing going to work. Do they email us the parts we can print off. It seems like the wiseflow will show the whole paper so do we have to select pages to print - that will be a wasteful amount of candidates time.

  18. The FAQ has been updated with further Information on how the split of paper C is going to be implemented:

    "In the first part of the paper, you will be provided with a letter from a client, prior-art documents, a description of the patent to be opposed and a number of its claims. Within the allotted time, you will be required to draft as much of a notice of opposition as it is possible based on the documents at hand. This first part of the notice of opposition must be handed in at the end of the first part of the exam.

    In the second part, you will be provided with one or more additional claims of the same patent. You may also receive further information such as another letter from the client, further prior art and/or supplementary parts of the patent's description. You will be required to draft a second part of the notice of opposition, which will form, together with the first part you already provided, the complete notice of opposition which will be marked. This second part of the notice of opposition must be handed in at the end of the second part of the exam.

    If an attack which is available in the first part of the paper is discussed only during the second part of the exam, no marks will be awarded to that attack."

    1. I had not yet spotted that, thanks! ;)

      We opened a seperate blog on the two-part structure of C:

  19. They have provided over 60 pages of instructions and expect candidates to spend several hours to go through them - can they also provide a video tutorial on the wiseflow.

  20. The EQE 2021's paper C will be split into two parts.

    In the first part of the paper, you will be provided with a letter from a client, prior-art documents, a description of the patent to be opposed and a number of its claims. Within the allotted time, you will be required to draft as much of a notice of opposition as it is possible based on the documents at hand. This first part of the notice of opposition must be handed in at the end of the first part of the exam.

    In the second part, you will be provided with one or more additional claims of the same patent. You may also receive further information such as another letter from the client, further prior art and/or supplementary parts of the patent's description. You will be required to draft a second part of the notice of opposition, which will form, together with the first part you already provided, the complete notice of opposition which will be marked. This second part of the notice of opposition must be handed in at the end of the second part of the exam.

    If an attack which is available in the first part of the paper is discussed only during the second part of the exam, no marks will be awarded to that attack.

    1. This is literally the worse idea I've heard. You are required to read all prior art documents in part one but have less time to write and attack the claims in part 1 as you need to read everything. Some prior art documents may not be useful and thus, wasting your time in the first part.

      The second part - you may be provided a further set of notice of opposition and further art, additional claims but the patent remains the same.

      In that case, if you do find an attack later on in the second part for the claims in the first part - you can't attack it. WHY? it's the same patent and the same set of documents for both parts 1 and 2.

      It is confusing the hell out of me.

    2. There is more reading involved for part 1 so they need to account for this. It seems that Part 2 will also involve alot of reading and thinking so they need to account for this too.

      Also - how can you draft a notice of opposition at the beginning when you don't have all the prior art documents available i.e. name of proprietor, prior art documents used in notice of opposition, name & address of representative.

      I'm also confused with this.

    3. The issue here is that you can no longer see your Part 1 after you've submitted it. So you can't just update your notice of opposition at the start as you probably don't remember what you put in it by the time you tried to attack the claims.

      It seems a bit shambolic and unnecessarily complicated. It will be better if they just have 2 different set of patents to attack.

    4. We opened a seperate blog on the two-part structure of C:

  21. I think it needs to be clear that the prior art documents they provide in part 1 will only be used for part 1. The prior art documents released for part 2 will only be used for part 2. Otherwise, candidates will spend an awful amount of time reading the prior art for part 1 thinking that some of these art can be used for part 2 too. They need to make it much more clearer.

  22. From the "Tips for candidates" tutorial:

    "It is not possible to highlight the text in the assignment."

    Ok, this will be really problematic, in particular for DII - you can't print anything except the calender, but you also can't highlight the assignment. Considering how much emphasis basically every methodology places on proper highlighting, this will make it considerably harder not to miss crucial Information.

    1. They have managed to design something to make it harder for candidates and a set up to fail candidates.

    2. This is a disaster if I use the DeltaPatents' methodology I followed last year

    3. I totally agree. The non-possibility of highlight in the text of the assignment is a huge obstacle for candidates. Totally unfair compared to past EQE.

    4. @Johan: why would it be? I see no reason why our methodologies would not work on the new design (maybe with some minor, rather straightforward, adjustments). if you make such statements, please give your arguments. Non-reasoned statements get no marks in the exam!

      For D, our annotated time line and the checklists can be used the same way as before, in the same form and format, on paper. Our methodology does not heavily rely on annotation: the timeline and the checklists have all relevant information.

      For C, Try this: do our C Meth during the 1st part with the information available then - no adjustments needed. During the second part, again use our C Meth again, using all docs, new section of description, new claims (see our dedicated blog -; also check whether new attacks possible on old claims - that is only a minor adjustment to the C Meth. In C Meth, all tools are paper tools, which can be sued as usual.

      It is a disadvantage that you cannot annotate the paper, for all main exam papers, also for C and D. But it does not drastically change the methodology and you can adapt for the differences in the next two months.

      As far as annotations are concerned: you can copy (part of) the paper into your answer file and you can annotate in their using boldface, italics and underlining. That may be an acceptable alternative for paragraphs of the paper that you want to annotate heavily, even though it is of course never as easy and versatile as doing it on paper (where you are not limited to just underlining).

      Being able to search in the pdf file of the paper is by the way a huge advantage for some papers, as is (for most) being able to type rather than handwrite your answer, as well as being able to easily edit your answer, and the extra time you get for the pre-exam, paper C and D in view of the reduced freedon to allocate your time.
      So some of the disadvantages of the e-EQE system and paper may be compensated (or even better) by its advantages.
      And... with earlier adjustments to exam paper designs (as well as with the introduction of the pre-exam), the exam committees and the examination board have always taken the new situation into account.

    5. I am not sure about one point: in the FlowLock it seems not possible to copy from the assignment and past into the the answer file - as far as I understand. In any case, thanks Roel for pointing out positive aspects rather than the disadvantages.

  23. They assume that it is trivial for candidates who may not be technical to set up a reliable environment to take the exam. Everything is the responsibility of candidates.

    I cannot believe they included this in the user guide:
    "Candidates are responsible for ensuring that they have a reliable power network."
    If you think your power network might be unreliable "we recommend that you have a UPS (uninterruptible power supply)"

  24. I just tried out the general (not EQE specific) trial of the lockdown browser. Account set up and installation is simple.

    You can add tables to the answer so electronic prior art tables are fine. Not being able to highlight and annotate the PDF's is painful. I work 100% electronic in the day job and these features for PDF's are basic.

    Main issue is that you can only ever have a single document on the screen. There is no way (in the general demo version) to have 2 documents viewable at the same time. Hopefully the EPO tailored solution is different.

    I am not sure that in exams that require careful comparison of documents that this is a good solution.

    1. I should have added that once you log into Wiseflow with your EPO details -

      -> click your name on the top right, hit edit profile;
      -> on the system requirements tab you can download the LockDown browser and do a general test of functions.

    2. @Martin:

      You wrote "There is no way (in the general demo version) to have 2 documents viewable at the same time."

      The User Guide Mock 1, Wiseflow Tutorial and Tips for candidates on the e-EQE page show that you can arrange the pdf file of the paper and the editor side-by-side.

      The Tips for candidates says, on page 4:
      "At the bottom of the preview there is the button to open the assignment in a separate tab. Multiple and independent instances of a document can be opened, but the name of the tab cannot be changed.
      In the separate tab, pdf bookmarks (left arrow) can be used to navigate within the assignment.
      [shows figure with the bookmarks in a bookmark tab next to the text]"

    3. @Roel

      It is basically a tabbed browser. You cannot open another window of the browser.

      User Guide Mock 1: It is true that you can have a single instance of the assignment open in the tab beside your answer. It did not seem to be possible to have another instance of the assignment open, i.e. you could not have your answer, a claim set, and a prior art document visible. The version you can view cannot be copied and posted from.

      Tips for candidates. page 4: you can open as many browser tabs with the PDF assignment open in it as you like. These are in separate tabs. They cannot be opened in separate windows. So you can view one tab only. Again cannot view a claim set & prior art (or any two documents) at the same time on the same screen.

      It appears that the PDF viewer is browser based so just like viewing PDFs in any browser it is not possible to highlight or annotate.

      The version I was looking at was the non-EQE demo. I have no idea if additional functionality will be enabled for the EQE.

    4. Martin / Roel, I also tried the demo.
      In the demo there is only 1 page assignment in pdf and it can be opened by the side of the text editor so the paper in pdf and the answer can be viewed side by side. In the pdf however I cannot select/copy.
      If I open the assignement in a new tab, then I can select/copy but I cannot paste for now in the text editor maybe because it's a demo. And I must switch between tabs - tab 1 text editor, tab 2 - the assignment/paper in pdf
      For sure we'll see the full functioning at the Mock 1
      It does not seem so complicated

  25. It is too much changes - I dont have time, energy and resources to satisfy all these. And who knows what will change next - I cannot even keep up with the announcements. I get emails that web sites have changed, and I have to figure it all out myself, or look on unofficial blogs. The epi announced a special committee for the eEQE and they are completely silent and invisible.
    I will withdraw from all the exams and try and get my money back, including the administration fees. I did not expect for this. At least in 2022, it will be stable.

    1. Do not give up, Johan. I tried the demo, it does not seem so complicated. In plus we have two more months to train.
      We'll have furthermore Mock 1 and in Jan Mock 2
      It's true that we will be guinea pigs but from now one the EQE will be held always electronically

    2. Yes, but we are training to get up to speed with the admin process and this is not time well spent for revising for the actual papers.

    3. Why do not you look for the benefits rather than complaining about a 10-minute hurdle of setting up the system?!

      20-25% extra time for paper C and D (and for Pre-Exam, but that hurdle does not need to be takn anymore by me)
      Copying (although I do not intend to use that a lot. Maybe for the claims in B and C)
      Sitting behind your onw computer at your own workplace or at home
      Free breaks for C and D to refresh

    4. KJ

      Candidates are not supposed to worry about the huge amount of admin and IT requirements placed on them for the exams. It is not easy for candidates to provide and pay for their own printers, webcam, monitor and other bits and bobs needed. Plus, I know many are worried about what to do in case of IT failure.

      I agree that there are advantageous but you also need to recognise the disadvantages i.e. admin and IT burden.

    5. Are you serious? Come on, get real, be realistic, be reasonable and stop giving prima facie invalid arguments!

      We live and work in the 21th century. Since decades, patent attorneys use computers to draft and file patent applications... and you do not have one?!

      We live and work in 2020. Since March, patent attorneys work from home, contact with colleagues and clients are via Skype for Business and Teams, and since this summer oral proceedings before the Examining Division are exclusively held by videoconferencing, those before the Opposition Division since more recently as well, and even those before the Boards of Appeal... and you do not have a webcam and microphone?! if really not, then you will need them anyhow as soon as you can act before the EPO.

      We are technically qualified, otherwise we cannot sit the EQE. The installation of Wiseflow is without any difficulty, if you tried. Did you try? (And yes, the system is not perfect, but it is good enough to work with and it has so few features that it takes virtually no time to learn it. I hope they solve the issues, but I can work with it as it is now, I also understand that this is the first run of an online EQE and that it will develop further in the future. Nothing and nobody is perfect, after all).

  26. There are so many substantial changes and it is very time consuming indeed. I had to get the technical guys at the office to help me out with some of these requests. It is very overburdening and I've been reading the whole thing for the past 2 days.

    My problem is that you can only install this on one computer but let's say for example, that you download the software onto the office PC and then lockdown happens and you are forced to do it at home. Is there any flexibility to download the wiseflow onto more than 1 PC.

  27. I am having huge problems with the text editor. I cannot copy and paste from the pdf files (exam papers) onto the text editor. Can anyone help???

    1. same here. Copy and paste doesn't seem to work for me.

  28. There is an awful lot of admin, IT requirements to get right here before you can sit the exams. It is a heavy burden. I think the EPO need to provide a much simpler system for candidates.

    1. I agree, to get things right for the exams take up alot of your time.

    2. Typing in an editor is daily routine.

      Reading from a screen is daily routine.

      Setting up the system took me only a few minutes. Hassle-free.

      Only negatives so far:
      - the side-by-side view does not allow copying;
      - the side-by-side view does not allow paper on the left and editor on the right

  29. Coronavirus is wreaking havoc in the UK. Does the EPO have a backup plan if candidates are unable to travel on exam day and if they have already selected to download their lockflow onto their office computer.

  30. Am the only one to wonder what is planned in case of internet problem? I mean, if there is an internet failure during the exam (because of the internet provider), what do we do? We fail the exam?

    1. Unfortunately the burden is all on the candidates shoulders. It's not right in my view. Candidates should not be burdened with IT and admin requirements.

  31. Does anyone know how to zoom in on your text editor. The default position makes it tiny and you can't easily read what you've written and you can't zoom in or out of it.

    Also, there is no line spacing either which makes things more difficult to read your script on screen.

    1. Try font size or Paragraph type.

      I use larger font size than the default of 11, is better.

    2. Der Zeilenabstand hat 1 ½-zeilig zu sein.

      Rule 49(8) for Paper A.
      Rule 50(1) for Paper B.

    3. Tip:

      The line spacing cannot be changed as such, but you can get a larger line spacing:

      If you select "Heading 4" as layout option (menu top left called “Paragraph”), you get line spacing 1.5-2.0 (depending on the font size used).
      Selecting "Heasing 4" may also result in a change to the font size (when i did it the first time, it changed to 14), but you can change that back thereafter using the font size menu.

      You can use it for an essay-form answer as well as for enumerated or bullet-list answers.

      When I use “Heading 4” and present my answer in a bullet-list (as I always for for DI as well as DII, as well as in C and in my arguments in B), and then use font size 12, I get a nice 1,5-spaced bullet list.

  32. The system installed smoothly.

    I am using a laptop with the laptop screen disabled and a 23" external monitor, 1920x1200 that I am used to. If I would sit the exam, I would buy a slightly lager one, a 27” would be optimal.

    As a tutor, I have access to all flows, Pre-Exam as well as main exam papers.

    For answering the main exam papers, one can choose to havee the editor and the paper side-by-side (but then no copying is possible from the paper into the answer) or in different tabs (then copying is possibloe, but you can only see eitehr the paper or your answer). It will be very mich a personal preference what is preferred.

    The Mock 1 papers serve to test the system and to get familiar. At first sight, it seems easy to operate, and there is also (see Tutorials etc on e-EQE page) good backup solutions in case you loose the internet connection while doing the exam.

    As expected, this first Mock uses previous papers, without any substantial changes – the papers are only amended to be in the multiple-part form (Pre-Exam, C and D) and are avalailable as pre-printable parts (e.g., prior art) in Wiseflow and as full papers online (in the LockDown browser). For C, the original client’s letter has been changed (“A1 was not available in full yet” in first client’s letter I first part; “A1 now fully available” in second clients letter in second part) Candidates can thus test the system and compare their answers to that from the Compendium, or to updated model solutions from our webshop.

    The papers used are:
    - Pre-Exam 2019
    - A 2019
    - B 2019
    - C 2014 (Razor blades)
    - D 2016 (incl DII Coffee Capsules)

    So, the system is setup to get me familiarized with it and the way the papers are presented does not give any unpleasant surprises. We will need to get some practice to deal with the fact that not all information is available on paper, but that disadvantage may well be outweighted by the advantages of typing (editing, copying) and searching (in the papers).

    Good luck and have fun!

    1. Hi Roel, for A, B and D I think the changes are OK for me to deal with.

      I'm very concerned about paper C format. I personally feel there is too much to read and analyse in part I since all the prior art documents are made available in part I. I don't think there is enough time to read some of A1, read 6 prior art docs and attack claims 1-3 in only 3 hours.

    2. Hi Nelly,

      This may be an effect of the use of an existing paper for this Mock, where it may be difficult to present the prior art in two stages. The information on paper C in the FAQ indiated that prior art may be introduced in two stages in the real e-EQE (which seems quite likely). The main purpose of this Mock 1 is to allow you to get familiar with the system, and there are no time constraints - there is also no time indications given for the different parts. Maybe you will need somewhat more time than scheduled for part 1, but quite a bit less for part 2 with this Mock 1?

    3. Thanks Roel - that has eased my concerns a little bit and I hope you are right about the C format.

  33. I don't like this switching between tabs for option 2. Option 1 you cannot copy and paste. This system needs reworking.

    1. That is strange - they have made a choice to disable the function in option 1. This is going to be really annoying as you will try to use both, but forget which one allowed copying.


    The find function is Not accurate at all in the Pdf version. I tried searching for 'membrane' in Paper A and it highlight all sorts of different things. I don't think you can trust it.

    1. You are right. I try doing the same just now and the 'find' function is terrible. It's not accurate and highlights blank text.

      This is a big problem.

    2. That is a common problem with pdf's if they are not made properly - the embedded text is sometime nonsense.

    3. This is not ideal during exams. They will need to fix this ASAP.

    4. I searched on "incubator" in the A-paper.

      It found these and ONLY these:
      carbon d (page 1, line 21)
      rame incr (page 3, line 24)
      to allow g (page 7, line 10)
      he incuba (page 7, line 11)
      particula (page 9, line 7)

      No good

    5. The search seems to work well in the C-paper.
      (So, it may be a problem with the pdf file of paper A and not of the search functionality itself.)
      Or did some of you also have problems with the search in paper C?

      The C paper also has bookmarks: “Letter of opponent”, “Annex 1”, “A1 claims”, “A1 drawings”, “Annex 2”, … , “Annex 6“, allowing to quickly jump to a relevant document.

      Tip: you can open multiple instances of the same paper when using “Open in a new Tab”, so that you can e.g. have the page with the claims of paper C in one Tab, the corresponding part of the description in another Tab, and the prior arts in again other tabs. (Note: I did not find a way to change the tab name – they are now all called WISEflow).

    6. The A paper has no bookmarks.

      Not to Client's letter, not to claims, not to drawings, not to prior art.

      I hope it will in the real exam!

    7. Search also works fine in D.

      Search also does not work in B.
      Same problem as above by Anonymous 22 December 2020 at 12:45. I tried "liquid".

    8. and when I tried "cooking", I found that the search always ends 1 line above the line with "cooking" at about the same location.

      So the pdf has not been made in the correct way: characters visible by the search are displayed vs the image that we see. Easy to solve if you have the original.

      Can this please be solved, so that we can familiarize ourselves with correct versions of the paper A and paper B, that are searchable an that have bookmarks?

    9. Interesting observation.

      I again searched on "incubator" in the A-paper.

      Indeed all "hits" are also here exactly 1 line above the appearance of "aperture".

      Now that I know this, I can use the search while practicing (workaround: look one line up), but I hope they fix it as soon as possible!!

      Peter (Anonymous 22 December 2020 at 12:45)

    10. I have only tried A and B and the search functionality is absolutely terrible. They need to release a new patch to fix the problems.

      I will try C an D later but sounds like the search functionality works better in those papers.

      We cannot afford to have unworkable copies of the exam paper on the real day so I hope they get to the bottom of the search functionality quickly.

  35. The Mock 1s are using these old papers. Part of the papers are printable, parts only available online.

    Pre – Exam 2019:
    - Legal part: only calendars printable (part 1 and part 2)
    - Claims analysis (part 3 and part 4):
    o Description of clients’ applications, but not the claims; D1, D2 / D11, D12
    o Not the questions/statements

    A 2019
    - Printable:
    o 7 pages of clients letter only online
    o Drawings of clients letter arfe given
    o Prior art given

    B 2019
    - Printable:
    o 5 pages of decriptions and claims only online
    o Drawings of application are given
    o 2 pages of the communication only online
    o Prior art given
    o 2 pages of clients letter and amended claims only online

    C 2014
    - Part 1 Printable:
    o Clients letter, but not the same as in 2014: info added that register was not functioning well – A1 not complete (only par 1-15, claims 1-3 and fig. 1-2)
    o All prior art
    o Not yet available in part 1: page 5 and 6 ([016]-[021])’ Fig 3 and 4 (page 9 of A1)
    o Only online in part 1: claims 1-3; claims 4-6 not yet
    - Part 2 : printable:
    o New clients letter – remaining parts of A1, “A1 needs to be opposed in its entirety”
    o Claims only online (all claims: 1-3 from part 1 plus new 4-6)

    D 2016:
    - DI, part I – Q.1 (6), Q.3 (7), Q.5 (8) – total 21 points
    - DI, part II – Q.2 (10), Q.4 (9) – total 19 points
    - DII – Coffee Capsules (unchanged; original dates)

  36. What is about testing the camera? Is there a possibility to get to know in advance whether the camera system/position is allowed? At the moment, I prefer using laptop's camera with laptop being connected to external screen, the external screen being placed in front of me and the laptop being placed at a side position. It would be possible to place laptop in front of me (i.e. below external screen), but such solution would limit available space on the desk.

    1. Good question. Same situtaion for me. This should be clarified very soon.

    2. It said that a dedicated FAQ would come:

      "Updated 12/2020 - What screen size is recommended?
      The screen should not be too small. In the mock exams, candidates should test which screen size best suits them. However, only one screen is allowed by the LockDown browser. Candidates using an external monitor attached to a laptop should make sure, that the built-in laptop screen is switched off, or is disabled. In the case of a built-in laptop camera, they should also pay attention to the correct camera configuration, as the active camera should also be placed close to the external monitor. More information on the technical configuration will follow later AS WELL AS A DEDICATED FAQ ON THE CAMERA."

    3. I am having an issue with the built-in camera of my computer. it seems that the LockDown Browser ignores it and does not request access to it.
      According to EPO's tutorial, a small camera icon should be present in the toolbar, in my case it isn't. Does anyone know if it is normal at the current stage?
      Mock1 is not supposed to take camera into account at all, but I have the same issue with the Demo Flowlock that should allow testing the camera.

      Do you all have the small camera icon in the browser? Or should I worry at a later stage?

      Thanks in advance for your help!

    4. Same here - it doesn't recognise my camera.

    5. In my case, I am with an iMac, running Mojave, and using the built-in webcam. The tips given by Wiseflow of simply adding LockFlow in Privacy and Settings for this case does not work because LockFlow does not even try to connect with the webcam.I just wonder if other have solved this issue and how.

    6. Wish the FAQ was updated with information about the camera. Built-in laptop camera? External USB camera? Phone camera? Resolution? Placement? Testing? A dedicated FAQ was announced more than a month ago. When will that be available?


  37. Cannot copy from the paper while maintaining formatting of the question:

    you either get only 28-character long sentences,

    or -if you use, as suggested, the “Remove formatting” button, you loose all the formatting, including line and page breaks.

    The “Remove formatting” does not only remove the line breaks that are created by the copy-paste, but also all already existing line breaks and paragraphs breaks!

    Very annoying.
    Need to reformat by hand, waste of time.
    Please fix.


    1. I agree. I'm also finding the copy and paste function very annoying and it is not optimal.

      The 'find' function in the exam paper is wholly inaccurate and wasting valuable time. It can't find common words in the exam paper.

      Worth sending the EQE this feedback. So far, I don't find these changes useful at all and it's terrible to use.

    2. I am too finding the "find" functionality terrible. It is not even selecting the relevant sentences and seems to be random. This needs to be fixed.

  38. It just seems like this system has not been tested. There are some issues with formatting, copying and pasting and search function. You can't even zoom onto your exam script as the text editor is a tiny window.

    Don't roll out something that has not been tested properly.

    1. "the text editor is a tiny window."

      Tiny? On my screen, it is half the size (almost full height, half width) of my 23" screen if I open the paper in a separate tab (so I can copy), or about 40% of its with if I have the paper side-by-side.

    2. The point is that you can't zoom in and out of the text editor so it is tiny for my liking. You can zoom in and out of the pdf viewer so why not make it the same for your own script.

      There are also numerous issues with the copy and paste function ( it seems to be copying the line numbers on the side of the margins) and the search function is hopeless and inaccurate.

  39. The Pre-Exam Mock 1 is based on Pre -Exam 2019:

    Part of the papers are printable, parts only available online.

    - Legal part:
    o only calendars printable (part 1 and part 2)

    - Claims analysis (part 3 and part 4):
    o Description of clients’ applications, but not the claims; D1, D2 / D11, D12
    o Not the questions/statements

    “Questions must be answered by ticking the appropriate circle next to each statement at the end of each question”
    So, not on a separate “bullet sheet”. This removes the risk that some candidates ran into in the paper exam of making errors when copying your answer given on the paper copy of the question to the bullet sheet.

    “Please make sure you answer ALL statements in each question”
    Tip: if you answered 1 out of 4 statements, the question is no longer labelled as “Unattempted” – that label is only given if none of the statements are answered.
    Tip: After you answered T or F, you can change your answer from T to F or from F to T, but you cannot get it back as left open. Use a sticky note if you want to sigal that you need to review that still!!

    All legal and claims analysis questions are tri-langual: Client’s application, prior art, Claims, statements are all given in all 3 official EPO languages for every question.
    A disadvantage may be that you may need to scroll within a question
    An advantage is that you can easily check another language version if you are not certain about the meaning of a word (e.g., if you are not a native English speaker, also check the German version for a clarification).

    The legal questions are self-contained, apart from the calendars that are given as pdf and can be printed in advance.
    Also the claims analysis questions are self-contained: where a question is about novelty, the question itself contains all the full text of clients description, the claims, the figures (if any), the prior art (and, if any, its figures) and the statements. This results in some duplication of information over various questions. A major benefit is that you have all the information you need to answer the set of 4 statements together within the question.
    Tip: use the printable version to have a single paper copy of the description and the prior art that you can also annotate.

    Notepad allows to make notes which remains available when working on the next question.
    Can copy from the question into the notepad if you want to, e.g., “memorize” or “reuse” some information for the next question.

    Sticky notes are available within a single question. You can use them to note some of your thoughts, e.g., the key legal provisions or finding places you use to answer the statement, such as Article, Rule, Guidelines paragraph, a page in your reference book such as “References to the European Patent Convention” by Jelle Hoekstra, or our Q&A Books ("Basic Legal Questions for Pre-Exam and Paper D"). Alternatively, you can make such notes on paper.

    You can highlight parts of the text of the question (letter, prior art, claims) using a yellow highligher.

    You can annotate in “Drawing Mode”, to, e.g., drawn a line/arrow from a key fact in the question to a statement.

    1. Hi Roel,

      You wrote "claims analysis questions are self-contained". Indeed, they are, but I would rather have a concise paper as with the paper version. There, description and prior art are given only once, only the items that differ are given each time (claims, statements).

      But as soon as I am in the exam, I cannot find the pdf-file of the client's application and the prior art that is available for printing. Instead, I need to read the description and the prior art again for every question, and also need to check whether they are maybe different from what they were in an earlier question. That takes a lot of time.
      Can we have the printable pdf also available while we do the paper?

      Also, the other languages are not needed. They only obscure the question. I do not consider that I an check other languages an advantage.
      Can we have a single-language pre-exam paper, as with the paper exams? Or the choice of hiding the other languages?

  40. The editor does not provide for strikethrough, only for underlining, boldface and italics.

    You may consider an alternative way to indicate deletion, e.g., the one allowed in the MPEP from the USPTO -714 Amendments, Applicant’s Action [R-10.2019]:
    "The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived"

    As this way is not common under the EPC, I advise to indicate that you indicate deletions in this way at the beginning of your answer.

    1. Good suggestion.
      I think we would want confirmation from the B committee that this would be the preferred way to indicate deletions.

      1. A vehicle with at least one wheel.
      1. A [vehicle] _bicycle_ with at least one wheel.
      Means vehicle has been replaced by bicycle.
      (As this box does not allow underlining, I added an underscore before and behind the underline word ;))

    2. This ok but there needs to be sufficient time built into the exam to allow for these changes to be made. one deleted word is ok but when you need to delete several words over several claims, I can see that it can be time consuming and this may be an issue.

    3. It is not mandatory to hand-in an amendments marked copy.

      You can also just hand-in a clean copy.

      You anyhow need to describe in your letter which amendments you have made, irrespective of whether you give a markup version or only a clean version.

      A clear clarification from the B Committee would be welcome!

  41. Not having strike through ability is NOT good. There has to be a uniform way for paper B otherwise people will come up with their own versions of amended claims. It will make things difficult if these things are not standarised.

  42. As far as I can tell, there are issues that needs fixing with the text editor and papers in the pdf format for the system to work for me.

    The "find" functionality is awful and seemed to be random. It is not selecting the right lines or words at all.

    The copy and paste feature is not ideal either. Removing the text editor helps a bit but you get random things copied over like the line numbering on the side of the margins. It takes time to go back and delete all of this.

    For paper B - there are no strike through and this will be problematic for claim amendments.

    I can also see that there is no way to space your words out on the text editor i.e. 1.5 line spacing so everything is bunched up together.

    If you have other issues, best to post on here so we all know about them. Hopefully, the EPO will fix these current issues before Mock 2.

    1. See above at my comment from 24 December 2020 at 10:40 for a way to achieve a larger line spacing.

  43. Did you see that the Mock of the e-EQE allows access to Legal texts!

    In the Pre-Exam as well as the main exam papers, you see a button in the top right corner of the browser "External Resources".

    That provides for a link to the e-EQE FAQ.

    From the e-EQE FAQ, you can browse to the EPO website (or, I assume, a mirror thereof), in particular to the Legal Texts such as the Guidelines.

    I expect that the real e-EQE will not give you as wide access as now: access will probably be limited to the legal texts (Euro-PCT Guide is on another page, i.e. via "Applying for a patent", so am not sure about that; PCT Art, Rules and Applicant's Guide is on WIPO website, so not sure about that, but seems not unreasonable to get access to that as well) and the website search functionality will probably not be available.

    I expect that we will see the accessibility as it will be in the real exam during Mock 2!

    1. By the way, I would recommend to bring your paper copies, as you probably annotated those.

      But also then, the electronic copy would be a useful supplement if there is something you cannot find or need more information about.

      In any case, it is a real advantage to also have electronic access to the legal texts!

      It would be nice if they do not just include what is in Rule 22(1) IPREE, but also:

      - Euro-PCT Guide

      - PCT Applicant’s Guide, Introduction to the International Phase
      - PCT Applicant’s Guide, Introduction to the National Phase
      - PCT Applicant’s Guide, Annexes
      - All subpages of - e.g., the list of PCt States, Time Limits for Entering, Restoration of the Right of Priority, Reservations and Incompatibilities, ...

      - EPC Forms
      - PCT Forms

    2. That will be a huge help if we have access to an online and searchable version of the guidelines

    3. Is this confirmed as I cannot see it in the FAQ or official communications.

    4. I want to my D answer to be marked on the basis of the legal texts and document versions in force on 31 October 2019.

      Will this Oct 2019 version of all legal texts also be available via “External Resources”, or only those in force on 31 October 2020?

      Or will we, as in this Mock, see the actual status on the real EPO website and accordingly only see the legal texts in the versions in force on the actual date of the exam (2 March 2021 for D. Isn't that when the next version of the Guidelines just entered into force?)?

  44. In the lockdown browser (Chrome on an Imac) when clicking on the EN or FR for Aassignement it only open the DE version. Opening a separate tab works OK.
    Anyone else having this issue ?

    1. Do not immediately clock on the image, but click on "Select Assignment" - then you can choose which language version to open.

    2. You should have a button "select assignment" on top of the DE paper. Clicking it unfolds a menu for selecting the paper in EN or FR.

    3. Yes yes of course, it's exactly what I've done, sorry for not mentioning it. Anyhow For B, C and D I can choose then open FR version, but only for A when I choose FR, FR text appears but when I click on it DE text appears.

    4. When I select German in "Select Assigment", I get:
      - a German small image, but if I click in that I get a FRENCH text side-by-side;
      - a German text if I do "Open in new Tab"

      Looks like a wrong file is presented in the side-by-side view.

    5. Same when selecting English: French side-by-side or English in new Tab.

    6. Looks a lot like a beta released in a rush to keep the promise of a mock in December.
      Then come the question: how much of it can we trust (and adapt our methods to), and what D-days version will be ?

    7. It does feel like the software has been rushed and there are alot of things that needs correcting/fixing. Most of them have already been commented on here but it makes me more nervous using/testing it then reassuring me.

    8. FLOWlock keeps in the cache the paper in the language, which you first select and open in the window of the side-by-side view.

      Selecting a different language does not overwrite the cache of this window, but only updates the preview and the pdf link, so that the “correct” language is previewed and opened in a separate tab, but the separate window stays with the language of the cache.

      You can click the refresh button of FLOWlock to force clearance of the cache of the side-by-side window.

    9. Thanks, it works!

  45. 1, it is not possible for me shift the border between the text editor and the assignment so as to enlarge the paper content and make it readable on the same page;
    2. if I click on the assignment, only German version of text pops up, yet with an unreadable code on it;
    3. it is not possible to search in the paper/assignment text in both of the above modes;
    4. if I click "open in a new tab", an english version or french version of text is available in a new tab. I can search and copy as well from this text into the editor which is in another tab.

    so it is not possible to search the text of the paper while I put it side-by-side with the text editor. and if the text of the paper is put side-by-side with the text editor, only german version is available.

    the above is the testing result with the D1, first part.

  46. the software requests me to close the webcam .exe file before move on...

  47. I want to know how I can remove or uninstall the wiseflow software from my computer afterwards? I tried hard but cannot find it in my computer program files....
    could someone help?

  48. The announced Copy-paste appeared to be a great feature, but it is not, unfortunately.

    Copy-paste using Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V works fine when copying a part from your answer to your answer, within the editor. That can be useful. But I considered the main benefit with Copy-paste from the paper into the answer.
    But Copy-Paste from the pdf of the paper into the editor is not at all workable!

    These are the original claims in B (the line breaks correspond to the line breaks in the original pdf):


    1. A cooking process including the steps:
    providing a heat storage unit (3);
    concentrating solar radiation (12) onto the heat storage unit (3) to heat it; and
    cooking food (8) placed on the heat storage unit (3).

    2. A heat storage unit (3) for use in the process of claim 1, characterised by:
    a box (4) having heat-insulating walls and an opening,
    the box (4) containing a salt composition (6),
    a light-absorbing plate (5) fitted in the opening and in thermal contact with the salt
    composition (6), and
    a cooking surface (9) in thermal contact with the salt composition (6).

    3. Heat storage unit according to claim 2, wherein ...


    When copied in WISEflow/Lock Down browser from pdf to editor:

    1. A cooking process including the steps:
    providing a heat st
    orage unit (3);
    concentrating solar radiation (12) onto
    the heat storage unit (3) to heat it; and
    cooking food (8) placed on the heat storage unit (3).
    2. A heat storage unit (3) for use in
    the process of claim 1, characterised by:
    a box (4) having heat-insulating walls and an opening,
    the box (4) containing a sa
    lt composition (6),
    a light-absorbing plate (5) fitted in the
    opening and in thermal contact with the salt
    composition (6), and
    a cooking surface (9) in thermal contact with the salt
    composition (6).
    3. Heat storage unit according to claim 2, where
    ein the cooking surface (9) is a surface of
    a cooking plate (2) fitted in a second opening
    of the box (4) and in thermal contact with
    the salt composition (6).
    4. Heat storage unit according to claim 2
    or 3, wherein the heat storage unit (3) is
    portable by means
    of handles (10).
    5. Heat storage unit according to claim 2, where
    ein the cooking surface (9) is a surface of
    the light-absorbing plate (5).
    6. A solar cooker (1) comprising:
    a heat storage unit (3) according to any of claims 2 to 5;
    a parabolic mirror (11) for concentrating sola
    r radiation (12) on t
    he light-absorbing plate
    (5) of the heat storage unit (3)

    And if there would have been line numbers on the claims page, line numbers would also be in between the text after copying.

    After “Clear formatting”:

    Claims1. A cooking process including the steps:providing a heat storage unit (3);concentrating solar radiation (12) ontothe heat storage unit (3) to heat it; andcooking food (8) placed on the heat storage unit (3).2. A heat storage unit (3) for use inthe process of claim 1, characterised by:a box (4) having heat-insulating walls and an opening,the box (4) containing a salt composition (6),a light-absorbing plate (5) fitted in theopening and in thermal contact with the saltcomposition (6), anda cooking surface (9) in thermal contact with the saltcomposition (6).3. Heat storage unit according to claim 2, whereein the cooking surface (9) is a surface ofa cooking plate (2) fitted in a second openingof the box (4) and in thermal contact withthe salt composition (6).4. Heat storage unit according to claim 2or 3, wherein the heat storage unit (3) isportable by meansof handles (10).5. Heat storage unit according to claim 2, whereein the cooking surface (9) is a surface ofthe light-absorbing plate (5).6. A solar cooker (1) comprising:a heat storage unit (3) according to any of claims 2 to 5;a parabolic mirror (11) for concentrating solar radiation (12) on the light-absorbing plate(5) of the heat storage unit (3)

    It does not only remove the additional line breaks, but also the original line and paragraph breaks!

    System: hands off the formatting when copying!!

    Can this be repaired please?

    1. Same for Q.1 of original D 2016 (line breaks are line breaks in original pdf):

      During oral proceedings on 1 July 2015 the examining division decided to refuse
      European patent application EP-A. On 16 July 2015, applicant A received a notification
      of this decision dated 14 July 2015.

      a) When did the time limit for filing a notice of appeal expire?

      On 18 September 2015 applicant A filed a notice of appeal and paid the appeal fee.

      Consider the following situations:

      b1) Applicant A withdrew the appeal on 5 October 2015 without filing a statement of
      grounds of appeal. Will the appeal fee be reimbursed?

      b2) On 5 October 2015 applicant A filed a statement of grounds of appeal. In February
      2016, applicant A received from the Board of Appeal a communication under Rule
      100(2) EPC. In response to the communication, applicant A immediately withdrew the
      appeal. Will the appeal fee be reimbursed?

      When copied in WISEflow/Lock Down browser from pdf to editor:

      During oral proceedings on 1 July 2015 the
      examining division decided to refuse
      European patent application EP-A.
      On 16 July 2015, applicant A received a notification
      of this decision dated 14 July 2015.
      a) When did the time limit for
      filing a notice of appeal expire?
      On 18 September 2015 applicant A filed a no
      tice of appeal and paid the appeal fee.
      Consider the following situations:
      b1) Applicant A withdrew the appeal on 5 October 2015 without filin
      g a statement of
      grounds of appeal. Will t
      he appeal fee be reimbursed?
      On 5 October 2015 applicant A f
      iled a statement of grounds
      of appeal. In February
      2016, applicant A received from the Boar
      d of Appeal a communication under Rule
      100(2) EPC. In response to the communicate
      on, applicant A immediately withdrew the
      Will the appeal fee be reimbursed?

      After “Clear formatting”:

      During oral proceedings on 1 July 2015 the examining division decided to refuseEuropean patent application EP-A.On 16 July 2015, applicant A received a notificationof this decision dated 14 July 2015.a) When did the time limit for filing a notice of appeal expire?On 18 September 2015 applicant A filed a notice of appeal and paid the appeal fee.Consider the following situations:b1) Applicant A withdrew the appeal on 5 October 2015 without filing a statement ofgrounds of appeal. Will the appeal fee be reimbursed?b2) On 5 October 2015 applicant A filed a statement of grounds of appeal. In February2016, applicant A received from the Board of Appeal a communication under Rule 100(2) EPC. In response to the communication, applicant A immediately withdrew theappeal.Will the appeal fee be reimbursed?

    2. I encountered such a problem a few weeks ago, when I tried to solve paperless some old papers A, B.
      Then I copied each paragraph of the assignment, one by one. This was the only way to maintain the good alignement.


    3. That's absolutely terrible and I encounter the same issue. They need to fix these issues. The new system is making me uneasy and its not comforting.

    4. Please do not overdo the burden. When the exam would be on paper, you can not copy at all (or only once if you take scissors and glue). Adding a few linebreaks takes less time than writing it by hand. And after you copied it from the paper into the editor, and reformatted it, you can copy if within the editor whole maintaining the formatting.

      I am very happy that we can type and do not need to write by hand, so I can accept that not all is optimal! (But of course I also welcome a correct copy functionality, should not be difficult to repair that!...)

    5. (I posted the examples this morning as I thought it would be a big issue. But I practiced today, and... it works very well if you accept some reformatting. After that, the writing of the answer and the reuse of the copied&edited parts within the editor works fine! I have regained full confidence.)

    6. Kev - not sure you understand how the changes are difficult for others even if it is not difficult for you. For example, some candidates may wish to do it in the office and these may present further hurdles for them to get the set up right. There are also shortage of printers, webcams at the moment (I don't know why) so I advise you to not downplay other people's admin and IT concerns.


    7. @anon 23Dec20 13:38 - a lot of chips are in short supply due to supply chain disruptions. And a lot of people have been ordering webcams to work at home. I dont know why the EPO will not announce what you need.
      @kev - it is not easy to set this all up to be sure it all works. If something goes wrong (not impossible) then you have to fix it yourself, you may loose time and they can accuse you of cheating. Suppose the browser software will not start due to a conflict with your webcam? It is a big change for a lot of people.

  49. Hi, I have a question about notice of opposition in Paper C. How do we show that the notice of opposition is signed. There is no way of indicating this at the moment using the online format as far as I can tell.

    1. Yes, you can sign using a a text-string signature.
      But you are not allowed to disclose your name in the answer ;)

      See Guidelines A-VIII, 3.3 Form of signature

      "In the case of electronic filing of documents using the EPO Online Filing software, the signature may take the form of a facsimile signature, a text-string signature or an enhanced electronic signature. Where documents are filed using the EPO case management system (CMS) or the EPO Web-Form Filing service, the signature may take the form of a facsimile signature or a text-string signature (see OJ EPO 2018, A45)."

  50. in my opinion the situation is not as bad as the comments here make it look.

    the software can be easily installed and run on a pc.
    it is quite clear that a lot of things are not as they will be the day of the exam (paper C and D are clearly not split according to the exam schedule; pdfs for A and B have been uploaded with improper metadata so the ctrl+search function does not work; webcam not yet tested; etc).
    there are indeed some less than ideal things, however it's not impossible to work with the system.

    my major concern is that for A and B, and a little bit also for DII, not being able to highlight/mark the paper will definitely cost us time and probably facilitate mistakes. in my opinion what is really unfair is the fact that A and B have not been considered as affected by the changes as C and D, so no extra time has been awarded, however that is simply not true.

    at this stage I don't think that there is much that can be done to dramatically change the software options, maybe just to solve little problems (e.g. the ctrl+search funtion). however I do hope that the EPO would rethink the schedule of A-B to compensate for the hurdles of not being able to mark the most crucial parts of these papers.

    1. Being able to highlight/mark the paper is of crucial importance for me.


  51. It would be difficult for EPO to provide us with the possibilty to highlight the paper?

    Having some colours on the text would easy our task.

    Looking after the colours shortens the time and effort during the exam. For me it is the only way to be efficient.

    Just taking a short look and you can see the effect of the feature X because it is coloured in green.

    Colouring of the text was our main method to solve all of the papers until now.

    A very important tool has been removed.


    1. I dont understand why they left this out - all pdf programs have this these days.
      Nobody has mentioned it, but when reading off the screen, you can easily skip over words and even lines.
      I know a lot of people use highlighting. One way to compensate is to make some kind of overview on paper, referring to paragraphs.
      I also recommend contacting any tutors or authors who were teaching these highlighting methodg - they should already be thinking about how to change without losing too much time.

  52. It does not look that one can select the preferred language for the pre-exam. Also, still for tge pre-exam, I do not personally see how to open new tabs. Does anybody have the same issue? Would it be possible to at least have tge relevant parts displayed in one single language thereby reducing the need of scrolling? Thanks, Luigi

    1. I noted the same. In the Pre-exam in this Mock 1, there is no full pdf of the paper and no access to the pdf of the part of the paper that is available for printing in advance. I guess this is a limitation of the True-False system of the platform, as it seems most logical to provide a full pdf once in the LockDown browser and just have a True-False answer sheet as with the paper exam.
      You now get all information with the question (so, repeated for every question in the appropriate part 3 or part 4)

      (And also in all 3 languages which indeed requires quite some scrolling in the claims part; maybe also a limitation of the platform? or maybe an effect of this being a Mock and not the real exam? We will see during Mock 2 on 1 February)..

      *** Tip ***:
      now that you have it all complete in a self-contained question, you can benefit from annotation with the Tools on the right side!
      You can underline, but also make annex drawing annotation, such as an arrow from a paragraph in the description to a statement and/or to a claim and/or to a line in the prior art.
      That may be very useful!
      (NB: The pdfs of the main exam papers do not allow annotation in this Mock 1, but there you can open the pdf of the exam paper multiple times in multiple tabs so that you do not need to scroll up and down too much, but can rather quickly switch between Tabs - e.g., a Tab with the pdf open at the claims, a tab with the pdf open at the description and a Tab with the pdf open at the prior art)

      *** Tip ***:
      use the annotation, the Notepad (for the whole part) and the Sticky Notes (within a single question) to your advantage!

    2. Can you make a video of how you did the paper?

  53. My recommendation and my reasons: I understand the EPO is trying to prevent people from cheating or having any unfair advantage. But given the disadvantages above (and other disadvantages cited in this blog), I recommend allowing candidates to print the entire exam.
    First, I want to state the obvious: asking the EPO to make this test available to every candidate in several countries in the middle of a pandemic in less than 1 year is extremely challenging. I appreciate that the EPO is giving its best effort. I don’t believe there is a perfect solution, but I do believe the EPO is striking a balance between what is available and what is secure.

    Second, however, there are some difficulties with the current system that require test takers to focus more on the capability of the software than the actual substance of the test. It creates a distraction and risk that is taking away from the core principles being tested here. For example, the copy-paste feature does not work as well as a normal copy paste on MS Word or other applications. And candidates are limited to using copy-paste to certain scenarios (e.g., not in the side-by-side view, but only in separate tabs). Thus, any advantage with copy-paste compared to classic scissors and glue is lost or puts test takers at a disadvantage compared to previous years. Further, the “find” function does not work well (see posts above, but the gist of it is that it is not accurate). Again, any advantages of “find” compared to highlighting are lost or worse than previous years. Additionally, the complications with different screens that can be used (only 1 screen allowed) makes this a frustrating part for some candidates. In the past, candidates could look at different pages all on their table simultaneously.

    Printing the entire exam will prevent most of the issues that candidates are experiencing. The EPO should strike a balance between keeping the test secure and safe, but also making the test “easy to take” for candidates that are following the rules. If anything, I would be willing to just sign a statement to be recorded and observed. If I violate the rules in any way, the EPO can ban me from the profession. It is simple, I want to pass this test the right way and so do other candidates. Allowing us to print is just holding us to the honor code of being a patent attorney.

    Thus, I ask the EPO to let us print the entire exam to make this experience during a middle of a pandemic easier on those candidates that have been preparing. Alternatively, I believe that additional time should be added to papers A and B due to the difficulties of the test just like those mentioned for C and D. I can’t understand the reasoning to add time to C and D, but not A and B. Time is lost in A and B looking on a screen where you cannot annotated, cut, or otherwise observe in a normal fashion.

    Other countries have applied this approach to important exams and it has worked successfully. This way, the computer is simply a method for writing and provides no other advantage or disadvantage. It avoids a lot of frustration and problems.
    The pandemic requires us to act compassionately and trust others. I believe that printing an entire exam and trusting those test takers to not cheat is a fair request in this situation.

    1. Amen! I fully agree! the only way to make it work and keep it 'fair' is to allow to print the entire exam!

    2. I clearly also agree. However, I would be ok if they would at least award an extra 30 min to paper A-B as they have done for C-D. I think that the exam is doable with the present setting, but it requires a lot of adjusting, which will eat away a considerable amount of time.
      hopefully they can see that.

    3. I agree 100%, I hope the EPO sees this post.

  54. Over the years the EQE had an overall pass rate of ca. 33-34%. Marking being done in two batches, they can also adjust the marking to stick to the established 33% pass rate of previous years, whatever the e-EQE set-up.
    That being said, I'm wondering how they will treat the 2020 main exam candidates who have already exhausted all the relevant compendium papers for the 2020 session and also probably their employers will not pay the delta, ceipi a second time.
    The stats clearly show that second sitters have a fairly lower pass rate.

  55. The EPO has been seduced by the technology, instead of just looking at the big picture. The exams are not designed to be done electronically, and to avoid printing, they have had to come up with all these extra features that do not work well. They assumed that everyone will try to cheat, so they are designing the system accordingly.

    But there are also studies that show that more people are tempted to cheat if the conditions become so difficult. For many candidates, it is not easy just to "do it again next year" - there are too many real-life consequences.

    I think the Pre-Exam and DI can work, as these are the type of questions that are often done online. The system should allow those who follow all the rules to their best ability to pass. The solution is obvious: for EQE 2021, let every candidate print the full exam for the longer parts (DII, A, B, C) and also provide the full paper electronically. I think the Pre-Exam and DI can work, as these are the type of questions that are often done online.
    => candidates can more or less just concentrate on the content and not the environment
    => if there is a technical problem, you can at least continue
    => those who want to work digitally, can also do that. And please do as this will be the future. This needs to be settled for EQE 2022.

    Preference would be to not split C as well, but I realise that there may be health issues. But if you are working with a paper copy and typing, the screen breaks will be inherit.

    I also think that the chance of someone cheating at the EQE with DII, A, B, C has been overestimated. There are very few people who can look at a paper and figure out the correct solution - you are talking only about a second opinion, which could be wrong. The answers cannot be googled.
    Also if you get someone to take the exam for you, it is hard to find someone who is fully up-to-date and fast enough. There is no guarantee that they will have the correct solutions and no guarantee you will pass. Even the many "EQE tutors".

    The stakes are also too high - if you cheat and get caught, you will need to find a new career. And the person who helped you will be disciplined (assuming they are a national or European attorney).

    As Anon pointed out, let all candidates sign a declaration that they will not cheat or help someone cheat, and state the consequences.
    Also, for every candidate someone has to sign that they have completed the training period as legally required. That person could also sign a statement, stating that they have satisfied themselves that their candidates understands the requirements and that they are also unaware of any efforts to cheat on their behalf. As the official supervisor, they can also face sanctions or discipline actions. It is not unreasonable to ask them to declare that the location where the candidates will take the exam satisfies certain requirements.

    You could also ask all EQE tutors to sign such a declaration.

    1. I dream that it will be like this - my supervisor will sign, I am sure. I sign now!

    2. Agree that supervision would be the solution to use full paper copies of the exam paper.

      But would it be possible for every candidate to arrange that? Some are already complaining that they need to buy a camera (for about 20 euros or less!)...: would those be able to have a qualified European patent attorney to sit next to him or her for 4 full days?

      Equal conditions should be achievable for all 2000-3000 candidates per paper!


  57. Having tried out the new lockflow system over the past week, I can see some positives but also some negatives.

    Postives - advantage to type rather than write. You don't get hand cramp at the end.
    You can easily move paragraphs around.
    Copy and paste when it works

    Disadvantages - there are many. I don't like the switching of tabs.
    Reading on screen is really difficult and actually very bad for your eyes. I would prefer a printed version of the paper and still don't really understand why this is not allowed.
    Basic functionality are not available.

    I'm not against doing exams online but I do feel this system needs much more work to make me feel comfortable using it.

    1. I am very positive about the system: typing, editing, copy-paste.

      Except for one serious matter:
      reading from the screen of a text that is longer than 10 lines is sooooo much different to reading it from paper. And can also not annotate easily (to be honest, it is practically impossible).
      We need complete paper copies, for all papers!

  58. On our D blog, I posted an items showing how I an using the e-EQE platform when answering D, in particular when answering a DI question.


    Good luck!

    1. I am having such bad luck with the system. it keeps crashing. Is anyone else having this problem?

    2. I should add that it was working fine a few days ok so maybe its my computer.

  59. Could they build in "spell check" in the text editor into the system. I feel like this simple feature would aid the process and will make the lockflow much better to use.

    1. I agree. Spell checker is something they really need to add in.

  60. Albeit there are some comments on '6.6 Loss of internet connection during a FLOWlock exam' in the WISEflow guide for EWE candidates (Version for Mock 1), the section is too vague in light of the importance.

    What happens if could not hand in the answer sheet?

    This kind of important aspects has been referred to contacting the Examination Secretariat or to the responsibility of candidate.

    Connection problems often appears and these is often not in the sphere of influence of the candidate.

    At the date of examination, 1500 candidates will use the Flowlock browser. Has this been tested?

  61. I tried the B paper using an iMac computer:
    1). the copy and paste by ctrl-C and Ctrl-V does NOT work at all in either side-by-side or in a new tab.
    2). the search function does not work either.

    1. Which browser? I found problems with Safari, in spite of it is accepted.

  62. Having at least one additional editor would be necessary.
    The text in the first editor can be very long.
    Such extra editor would be used as rough or for comprising a reference text to confront to different parts of the first editor.

  63. Candidate_Language28 December 2020 at 12:58

    I have a quick question regarding the language of the examination papers. Once I started the Flow, I only get the paper in the language of my nationality/residence. I want to have access to the paper in EN. Is there any way to set this up?


  64. Candidate_Language28 December 2020 at 13:17

    ok, I found the answer:

    you can change the language of the paper documents in the tab: "Assignments".

    Best Regards!

  65. I have tried the mock1 with both Chrome and Edge, and opposite to what the EPO states in the manual (Wiseflow guide for EQE candidates (Version for Mock 1)), Edge works better than Chrome. In Chrome, I could only open two additional tabs with the assignment (paper B) and for the third one got an error message („problem with the pdf“), while in Edge I could open five tabs with different parts of the assigment displayed. Furthermore, unlike stated by the "tips for candidates for mock 1" under 1.2, in neither browser was I able to display the pdf-viewer tab side-by-side to the text editor tab by clicking on the (i)-button with the scaling options as described. If I scale down to 50 %, I only get all the tabs (assignment tabs as well as text editor tab) in smaller size. Has anyone solved that yet? Thanks in advance.

  66. For the computer-based EQE (previous years), candidates received a paper copy of the entire exam and had an electronic copy. These candidates were compared to other regular paper-based test takers from that year and previous years (points required to pass has stayed the same). Now, the EQE does not allow printing of the entire exam (only parts). This means the test takers are held to a different standard and yet compared to test takers who had the entire paper version (same number of points required to pass this year as previous years). Accordingly, it seems unfair that the EPO is not letting this year's candidates print the entire exam WITHOUT providing some type of compensation/adjustment in scoring, timing (for all papers, not just C and D), or conditions. Not to mention, this is a pandemic! EPO needs to consider this and allow us to print the entire exam to be fair and compared fairly to others in the profession. We understand that cheating can occur, but the EPO never asks EP attorneys to provide authorizations because mis-use is low and it is the same story here: no one wants to cheat because they could ruin their entire career.

    1. I agree. I would like to add that there is not sufficient time given to adjust to these major changes. Paper C for example is a significant change. Other papers also have significant changes and we are burning time trying to get to grips with the new system which will inevitably have an impact on revision time. The EPO need to consider this also. Changing system can take time for everyone to get up to speed. Not to mention that there are some flaws in the new system already as well documented here.

    2. Agreed 100%!

  67. I've just tried out paper DII on the lockflow browser. I can say that it has taken longer than expected to complete. It normally takes me 2 hours to read and highlight important pieces of text. Obviously, without the printed version, I had to adapt my method by writing more on my timelines. This took me an additional 20-30 minutes. So what normally takes me 2 hours actually took me 2.5 hours. This left me with 30 minutes to write the answer which was not enough. I ended up taking 3 hrs and 30 minutes-40 minutes to complete DII for 60 marks.

    They are going to need to shorten DII a bit more if we are to complete it within 3 hours even if the question is worth 50 marks.

  68. I cannot make the mock 2 scheduled for 1st Feb - 5th Feb and a few of my colleagues are the same. Unfortunately, balancing life/work with kids now at home (schools are closed in the UK) means that it is impossible for me to take a week off and do the mock 2. I suspect many candidates are in the same position.

    Do we know if the EPO will release the question paper and answers afterwards so candidates who cannot do the mock 2 can at least see the format.

    1. There is going to be alot of candidates in your shoes Flora. I do hope the EPO is reasonable. Many candidates this year will have additional burden on them like work pressures, furloughed, childcare, elderly adult care. This is not a normal year and the EPO must consider these factors in.

    2. Agreed. I hope there is flexibility with the mock exam. It's funny, we are required to train for 3 years before taking the EQE, which requires having a job with regular hours. However, we are just supposed to add another 4 days for a simulation to the required training? Not easy.

    3. Agreed! Help us out, EPO!

    4. The EPO needs to be flexible this year and in this period with the mocks. Lockdown is getting stricter in most European states and it is not easy for candidates to find the time to do a mock exam + the actual exams and balance work/life at the moment.

      Many tutors would surely agree to this and I hope the EPO will be as open as possible with the mocks as it would be very unfair for candidates who cannot sit the mocks for various reasons to find that they are at a huge disadvantage.

      There is no doubt that this years candidates have had a horrid time leading up to the examination and the process between now and March will NOT get any easier.

    5. Worth sending an SOS to the eqe-helpdesk as I'm in the same shoes as some here. I cannot afford to take a week off for the EQE mocks.

    6. BrightSidesOfLife5 January 2021 at 17:00

      It is not mandatory to do the Mocks.

      Mock 1 is offered to do at any time and as often as you want.

      Mock 2 is offered to allow a time-trial.

      I am happy with these Mocks. The could also have decided to simply go ahead without any Mock, as the platform is a well-established proven system. There were also no Mocks in MOC to simulate an exam in large exam hall conditions prior to the paper exams.

    7. It's not a proven system hence they needed roll out the mock 2.i think it is very reasonable for the EPO to provide flexibility for mock 2 considering the short notice they gave candidates.

    8. BrightSidesOfLife56 January 2021 at 10:27

      Why do you conclude there was a "need" for Mock 2 for "them"? Is Mock 2 not merely a SERVICE for us?

      But yes, I agree that extra flexibility for mock 2 is needed. Not all can arrange 4 days off, certainly not four consecutive days.

      My suggestion:

      - Mock2 with proctoring and in e-EQE schedule and conditions on the scheduled dates in first week of Feb for those that want to do a true exam simulation;

      - continue to have Mock2 available in the 3 weeks thereafter, allowing candididates to do it at their convenience (dates, times, consecutive or distributed), without active proctoring but with possibility to test camera and microphone

      Would that not serve everybody's needs?

  69. With the new lockdown measures in the UK and elsewhere in Europe, this is going to significantly affect revision and preparation for exams.

  70. Candidates this year are adversely affected compared to other years mainly due to the coronavirus. There is huge burden on family lives with schools closing and it will have an effect on work/life and revision. In addition, the huge changes to the EQE exams to shift from paper to online in little time has a big impact. There is no doubt in my mind that the uncertainty and additional burden will have an impact on candidates this year.

    Will the EPO account for these unique times.

    1. Most likely not. What's more likely to happen in my opinion is additional points distributed more "generously" in order to adjust the overall pass-rate a posteriori ....

  71. FAQ Updated 12/2020: "More information on the technical configuration will follow later as well as dedicated FAQ on the camera."

    Any news?

  72. Paper C in two parts

    "You will be required to draft a second part of the notice of opposition, which will form, together with the first part you already provided, the complete notice of opposition which will be marked."

    "If an attack which is available in the first part of the paper is discussed only during the second part of the exam, no marks will be awarded to that attack."

    I can understand that.

    But can I still read my answer to the first part when I an working on the second part?

    Can I still have my answer to the first part in an editor window when I am working on the second part so I can read it and copy from it? Maybe as a read-only file?

    Or can I access a pdf of my answer to the first part on a separate tab in the browser when I am working on the second part so I can read it and copy from it?

  73. Paper D in three parts

    The extra time for the two DI parts compensates well for me for the lack of a paper copy.

    For DII, the lack of paper is a serious problem. The extra time there is not sufficient to compensate for the additional work, for the effort of reading from the screen all the time, and for not being able to put parts of my answer side-by-side. Another 30 minutes extra would maybe be a more appropriate compensation.

  74. Paper A and B

    Doing them in Mock 1 took me much more time than with full paper version.

    Another 30-45 minutes extra would maybe be more appropriate for paper A
    Another 60 minutes extra for paper B.
    And some scheduled break time.

  75. Any news on the printer?

    Network printer in a different room in our office possible?a different same room as me?
    WiFi-connected printer in my office or my home allowed if in the same room?
    Only USB-connected printer with direct cable to my computer allowed?

    1. If Mock 1 is any indication, there are no restrictions on what you can do with your computer before the Lockdown browser is actually started. That means you should be able to access any network devices, including printers, in the phase leading up to the exam. Access to peripherals etc is only lost when the Lockdown browser is running, i.e., during the exam proper.

    2. Thanks, I hope this is a correct conclusion from Mock 1!

      But will it still hold when proctoring is in place?

      Wish the FAQ was updated with information about system requirements, camera, microphone, screen resolution and printer. When will that essential information be given?


  76. Questions about Mock2 - Paper D.
    1) Anyone knows if it will be available only on February 2?
    2) Which past paper it will based on? It would be useful to know this as soon as possible, so that we can leave that past paper only for later.
    Thank you.

    1. For all papers of Mock 2 my guess is that EPO will not use old papers, shall use one of the new papers prepared for 2020 or 2021 - redesigned in order to see the new content of DI 50 points for 3 h and DII 50 points for 3h; and also the content of C -part 1 and part 2.
      Old papers D/C do not work very well on this new schedule, especially for C in Mock 1 as there is no balance between the two parts...This is my logic as Mock 2 will be real exam conditions

  77. On any outstanding questions we will know the answer, hopefully, on the 14Jan at the EPO public meeting on eEQE, so it's better to address all the questions we have to the helpdesk before the meeting in order to receive an answer.

  78. Probably this is already known but I have made the following experience with the Lockdown-Browser. If you connect your mobile phone to your laptop for charging via USB, the browser detects this as an unusual use of the mouse/pointing device and warns you. If this happens a second time you will be kicked out the session. So I recommend not to connect any devices during the use of the browser to your usb ports.

  79. I'm spending most of time trying out the system, reading up on all the requirements and sourcing all the necessary equipment. I'm not actually revising the content as much as I would have liked. Anyone else in the same boat

    1. I am in the same boat. Actually, I have not started revising at all, because of the lockdown (childcare, work, etc.) However, since I was more or less well prepared for EQE in 2020 I hopefully benefit from my prepared and commented literature...sad

    2. I'm in the same boat. I find preparation this year very difficult indeed as mentioned above. Its an absolute nightmare over the last 8-10 months.

  80. When i start the Lockdown Browser i receive the message:

    Page failed to load.
    Error: (-130)

    Anyone knows how to solve this problem? I cannot start the flow...

    1. Try to restart your computer.

    2. I did restart the computer, of course. I even reinstalled the lockdown browser. Didn't work...

  81. Having played around with the e-EQE format I think this is overall a poor solution from a UX point of view. I did FD4(P6) of the PEB exams in October so I am comparing that.

    Main and most important difference is the platform. Wiseflow (or any browser based system) is a poor choice for an exam which requires comparison and annotation of documents.

    I think everyone above has noted the issues with only having a single window to work in and poor PDF functionality.

    Overall PEB solution was far better. They kept it simple. It worked.

    The e-EQE solution appears to be designed with no UX input.

  82. Paper C: I was 1h8’ short with the first part, and had 1 hr extra time with the second part. This was aggravated by seeing that I was short on time. I didn’t even know what I was reading anymore in a panic. And this is only one of 2 chances we get to practice the new system in two parts?? Why EPO? I wasted a lot of time trying to select text for cut and paste, more text than I wanted was getting selected, then the ridiculous formatting issue! Why make us work with this editor from pre-war times?? Why can’t we work with documents side by side? Why can’t we print the whole document?? What does that have to do with being an EPA? Just ridiculous! I was doing well with the normal test format, and now at the 11th hour I have to adjust to this?? After all we have been through?? Why?? We don’t even get enough material to train on the two part test? Doing the exam with the computer doesn’t save that much time at all, being able to search text either, claim terms may change and be hidden, so why do we have to put up with this? Why the sadistic cruelty?? The EPO has had decades to get modernize the test, now we have to put up with this crappy last minute improvisation. How can it be that an institution so connected with technological innovation has had such an old fashioned embarrassing system for so long, and now we have to pay for then scrambling to put together this pathetic solution?