The original post is in the Telegram EQE Main group.
The most important thing that you must do is to generate an answer that is sufficiently detailed to pass. They have always accepted accepted multiple answers, but they they will accept more if the exams are vague and long. See, for example, the comments during the Tutors Meeting 2024 that they accepted multiple answers for B which were not documented in the Examiners Report:
information.patentepi.org/issue-4-2024/tutors-report-eqe-2024-papers.html
It seems that all the EQE exams are moving towards vague and time-consuming (to read and/or understand) cases. So either:
- there was too little time/capacity to tune the exams for clarity and duration, relying more on the “fix it in the marking” approach, or
- it is deliberate to make it more difficult to cheat, so they have already anticipated multiple answers in the marking.
In any case, candidates should be officially informed by the Examination Board about these changes, so that they know what to expect in the future, how to deal with it, and understand how to interpret their answers when preparing using old exams. No official guidance has been issued.
So, to cope during any EQE exam, it is generally recommended:
- do not worry about getting the correct solution, but get a solution (trust your preparation) and get as far through the exam with your solution as possible to give them something to mark.
- briefly explain your reasoning based on the facts of the case, even if you think it is obvious.
- if you are being a little creative, always do the boring, straightforward Guidelines answer first.
- be aware of the parts of your answer that always score marks, and do those first. Or jump ahead, do them and go back to the rest.
The passing rate has always been adjusted during the marking. There is no target, but an acceptable bandwidth.
In general, the client is the technical and business expert who knows a little (or nothing) about patent law. You are the patent attorney. That is also the starting point in real-life. So, in real-life, it is 100% correct to point out in a discussion about an invention that something is not essential. Sometimes you only realise this when drafting. I always say to real-life inventors that their invention is in claim 3, and claims 1 &2 is what the patent attorney adds. In some cases, it is better to just go with “claim 3” to avoid a very broad search, and fighting for broader claims than needed takes longer and is more expensive. But you should discuss this with a client.
Unfortunately, the C exam (and in recent years, the B exam) provide little room for deviating from what they think is acceptable and reasonable. In some exams, the buzzwords “essential”, “not essential” were to be followed, and in others, not to be followed, So the exams are not consistent. When you read the model solutions, you realise that the Examination Committee is using any argument to defend their optimal solution. But they always pass people with different solutions. Some of these arguments have been overruled in subsequent appeals (but the model solutions are never updated).
So, if you think during the A/B exam that a feature can be left out, then you should follow that thought, but include the reasoning in your answer (in the “description” or as a note to the examiner). But make sure that the claim with this feature is included as a dependent claim – that will save you if you are wrong.
B-exams are my area of expertise 😉 – I only passed the NL B exam at the 3rd attempt and the EQE B exam at the 2nd attempt. I only passed after learning to dampen my creative impulses.🙈
Leave a Reply