EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

02.28.17

The Boards of Appeal Openly Complain (in the EPO’s Web Site) About Battistelli, But Don’t Tell Battistelli About It…

Posted in Europe, Patents at 10:10 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

…or this might happen

A shocked Battistelli

Summary: The Boards of Appeal have found the courage — in the face of a pattern of illegal retaliation — to state that Battistelli’s abuse of power compromises the perceived if not actual legitimacy of their decisions

Battistelli, having studied at ENA (a school notorious for producing French sociopaths), is accustomed to just intimidating and bullying those who don’t agree with him, even his bosses/overseers. So it’s hardly surprising that he’s scaring and punishing even judges, i.e. people who are far more qualified than he will ever be. Battistelli must feel lonesome and insecure at the EPO; he is surrounded by very clever people (although more of them are leaving over time) and at public events nobody wants to even speak to him. Any respect he may sense that he gets is purely out of fear, just like the Mafia’s Don (0% of staff and stakeholders tolerate Battistelli, based on polls). As someone from the inside put it last year: “People were chatting all around but all backs turned to him. He looked extremely alone, almost like a leper and maybe he also felt so. His body language showed enough: hunchbacked and looking down, avoiding eye contact with his staff.”

“Battistelli must feel lonesome and insecure at the EPO; he is surrounded by very clever people (although more of them are leaving over time) and at public events nobody wants to even speak to him.”The bully complex or inferiority complex is a well explained phenomenon that we probably needn’t explain to readers. It’s one possible explanation for the policies Battistelli — now enjoying immunity (crazy situation and a recipe for disaster of biblical proportions!) — foists upon everyone around him.

The other day we spotted this comment at IP Kat (which no longer writes about EPO scandals, but certainly continues to attract comments about it, from people who trust Google for anonymity):

Wow. The EPO’s annual report on the Boards of Appeal makes interesting reading… in that case Art 23 1/16 is now officially expunged from history. There is literally no indication in the report that the case ever took place.

I had wondered how Monsieur le President would handle this. Now I know. He has decided to contravene the provisions of the EPC yet again. Having suffered no consequences for doing the same in the past, he must feel confident of getting away with it again.

Frankly, I am disgusted by the ineptitude and cronyism displayed by the AC (as a whole) which has enabled this to come to pass under their watch. It makes you wonder which breaches of the EPC (or even crimes) they would actually take action over.

The “cronyism displayed by the AC,” as this person said, should make one wonder if Battistelli controls them by things he knows (and can have them scandalised/fired over), not necessarily money (EPO budget). Would “breaches of the EPC (or even crimes) [be things they would] actually take action over”? Some people have already compared this situation to that of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Speaking of crimes, we have something pretty big to show soon, but only after further and thorough verification (for our safety and the safety of sources).

“Speaking of crimes, we have something pretty big to show soon, but only after further and thorough verification (for our safety and the safety of sources).”Shortly after the above comment the EPO wrote: “The annual report of the boards of appeal of the European Patent Office 2016 is now available online” (linking to this page; warning: epo.org links can potentially be used to unmask readers).

Battistelli of course still crushes these boards, in spite of the EPC which he is trying to work around. He just keeps calling exile “independence” or “perception of independence”, so we can’t help but wonder if that fellow Corsican Napoleon (same place as Battistelli’s, but a more infamous person) felt like he was liberated after he had suffered expulsion.

Now read the following new comment about Battistelli:

G2301/15 made it online …

4.3.
Removal and judicial independence

The Enlarged Board stated in G 2301/15 that removing an irksome judge from office could be used to indirectly influence decisions. It was crucial to judicial independence that judges cannot be removed without special institutional safeguards. The requirement that a board member may only exceptionally be removed from office on a proposal from the Enlarged Board intended to make sure that unsubstantiated or groundless allegations could not be used as pretext for getting rid of an irksome judge.

https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/caselaw/2016/e/clr_iv_f_4_3.htm

But watch it disappear soon when El Presidente finds out!!!

Well, we have taken a screenshot just in case and added the likely facial expression of Battistelli (if or when he sees this).

“In our view, anything that the boards (including the Enlarged Board of Appeal) do right now we have to assume that they do under fear/terror from Battistelli, hence their judgement — by their very own admission — may already have been severely compromised.”As a side note, Battistelli’s propaganda mill, IAM, has just published a so-called “International report” (these are not reports but self-promotional pieces from legal firms) that speaks of the Enlarged Board of Appeal rules on partial priority” — a subject which we already covered here earlier this year. To quote: “A new decision from the European Patent Office (EPO) Enlarged Board of Appeal (G 1/15) marks a radical change in the EPO’s approach to assessing priority entitlement. The decision resets the EPO’s approach to assessing priority in the situation where only some parts of the claim are entitled to priority – a concept known as ‘partial priority’ – making it much easier for a claim to benefit from partial priority.”

In our view, anything that the boards (including the Enlarged Board of Appeal) do right now we have to assume that they do under fear/terror from Battistelli, hence their judgement — by their very own admission — may already have been severely compromised. The Angry Baby, baby Battistelli, will throw some more toys out of his pram if the boards do not cave in and become his toys, enabling ever-so-great ‘production’ figures (at the expense of quality, wellbeing of staff, common sense and so on). The Office is not functioning and the whole Organisation is in shambles.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. The European Patent Office Comes up With a Plethora of New Buzzwords by Which to Refer to Software Patents

    The permissive attitude towards software patents in Europe is harmful to software developers in Europe; the officials, who never wrote a computer program in their entire life, pretend this is not the case by adopting marketing techniques and surrogate terms



  2. Patent Maximalists in Europe Keep Mentioning China Even Though It Barely Matters to European Patents

    EPO waves a "white flag" in the face of China even though Chinese patents do not matter much to Europe (except when the goal is to encourage low patent quality, attracting humongous patent trolls)



  3. Team UPC Has Been Reduced to Lies, Lies, and More Lies about the Unified Patent Court Agreement

    With the Unified Patent Court Agreement pretty much dead on arrival (an arrival that is never reached, either) the UPC hopefuls -- those looking to profit from lots of frivolous patent litigation in Europe -- resort to bald-faced lying



  4. Links 17/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC3, Total War: WARHAMMER II, GNOME 3.31.2

    Links for the day



  5. Links 16/11/2018: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 Beta, Mesa 18.2.5, VirtualBox 6.0 Beta 2

    Links for the day



  6. Berkheimer or No Berkheimer, Software Patents Remain Mostly Unenforceable in the United States and the Supreme Court is Fine With That

    35 U.S.C. § 101, which is based on cases like Alice and Mayo, offers the 'perfect storm' against software patents; it doesn't look like any of that will change any time soon (if ever)



  7. Ignoring and Bashing Courts: Is This the Future of Patent Offices in the West?

    Andrei Iancu, who is trying to water down 35 U.S.C. § 101 while Trump ‘waters down’ SCOTUS (which delivered Alice), isn’t alone; António Campinos, the new President of the EPO, is constantly promoting software patents (which European courts reject, citing the EPC) and even Australia’s litigation ‘industry’ is dissenting against Australian courts that stubbornly reject software patents



  8. Patent Maximalists Are Still Trying to Figure Out How to Stop PTAB or Prevent US Patent Quality From Ever Improving

    Improvements are being made to US patents because of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which amends/culls/pro-actively rejects (at application phases) bad patents; but the likes of Andrei Iancu cannot stand that because they're patent maximalists, who personally gain from an over-saturation of patents



  9. Links 15/11/2018: Zentyal 6.0, Deepin 15.8, Thunderbird Project Hiring

    Links for the day



  10. A Question of Debt: António Campinos, Lexology, Law Gazette, and Sam Gyimah

    Ineptitude in the media which dominates if not monopolises UPC coverage means that laws detrimental to everyone but patent lawyers are nowadays being pushed even by ministers (not just those whose clandestine vote is used/bought to steal democracy overnight)



  11. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  12. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  13. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  14. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  15. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  16. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  17. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  18. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  19. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  20. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  21. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation



  22. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Will Spread the Berkheimer Lie While Legal Certainty Associated With Patents Remains Low and Few Lawsuits Filed

    New figures regarding patent litigation in the United States (number of lawsuits) show a decrease by about a tenth in just one year; there's still no sign of software patents making any kind of return/rebound in the United States, contrary to lies told by the litigation 'industry' (those who profit from frivolous lawsuits/threats)



  23. Links 12/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC2, Denuvo DRM Defeated Again

    Links for the day



  24. Automation of Searches Will Not Solve the Legitimacy Problem Caused by Patents Lust

    The false belief that better searches and so-called 'AI' can miraculously assess patents will simply drive/motivate bad decisions and already steers bad management towards patent maximalism (presumption of examination/validation where none actually exists)



  25. The Federal Circuit and PTAB Are Not Slowing Down; Patent Maximalists Claim It's 'Harassment' to Question a Patent's Validity

    There’s no sign of stopping when it comes to harassment of judges and courts; those who make a living from patent threats and litigation do anything conceivable to stop the ‘bloodbath’ of US patents which were never supposed to have been granted in the first place



  26. Patent Maximalists Will Latch Onto Return Mail v US Postal Service in an Effort to Weaken or Limit Post-Grant Reviews of US Patents

    An upcoming case, dealing with what governments can and cannot do with/to patents (specifically the US government and US patents), interests the litigation 'industry' because it loathes reviews of low-quality and/or controversial patents (these reviews discourage litigation or stop lawsuits early on in the cycle)



  27. Guest Post: EPO Spins Censorship of Staff Representation

    Another concrete example of Campinos' cynical story-telling



  28. Andrei Iancu and Laura Peter Are Two Proponents of Patent Trolls at the Top of the USPTO

    Patent offices do not seem to care about the law, about the courts, about judges and so on; all they care about is money (and litigation costs) and that’s a very major problem



  29. The Patent 'Industry' Wants Incitations and Feuds, Not Innovation and Collaboration

    The litigation giants and their drones keep insisting that they're interested in helping scientists; but sooner or later the real (productive) industry learns to kick them to the curb and work together instead of suing



  30. EPO 'Outsourcing' Rumours

    The EPO advertises jobs in Prague and Lisbon; this leads to speculations less than a year after António Campinos sent EU-IPO jobs to India (for cost reduction)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts