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

11.20.17

Team Battistelli’s Attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal Predate the Illegal Sanctions Against a Judge

Posted in Europe, Law, Patents at 4:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

A shocked Battistelli

Summary: A walk back along memory lane reveals that Battistelli has, all along, suppressed and marginalised DG3 members, in order to cement total control over the entire Organisation, not just the Office

LAST night we wrote about the EPO‘s latest attack on the boards, which have already been relegated to the ‘suburbs’ of Munich (Haar). It’s like Battistelli does not want these boards to exist, or wishes to overburden them to the point where they become useless for assurance of patent quality (prior art search and the like). He cannot legally knock them out of existence because of the EPC, but the EPC does not say anything about punishing them relentlessly, so Battistelli will probably get away with it. Now that his departure is almost imminent it’s ever more unlikely that he’ll lose his immunity and himself be subjected to disciplinary actions. 6 weeks from now he and Bergot will officially put the axe to long-term contracts. In other words, 6 months before he’s gone he’s totally destroying any prospects of the EPO ever recovering or salvaging the talent it once had.

Disturbing. To say the least.

We very much doubt the press will cover our findings regarding the Haar ‘party’, which is a sad display of irony if not black comedy. The press repeatedly ignores important stories and developments, as recently as weeks ago. Even comments on the matter might not get through. Here’s yesterday’s report of censorship in IP Kat (or maybe slow moderation by Bristows, or perhaps approval only after a complaint about it). “Censorship is never good,” the comment said. And yes, it’s about the boards. It often seems as though these matters cannot be brought up at IP Kat anymore, as people’s names cannot safely be mentioned (this limits useful debate). Truths are now “personal attacks”. To quote the comment at hand:

Why has my comment relating to recent case re entitlement of priority at the EPO not been accepted?

Is it because I mentioned the plea of a well known specialist about the fact that the EPO should only looking whether there is identity of invention?

I considered my comment as showing that the problem is not a specific one of British courts. No more, no less.

Censorship is never good.

We have meanwhile dug some archives and found the following letter from 3 years ago. We believe it demonstrates how, even before the ‘house ban’ of a judge (Battistelli broke the rules), the boards had come under attacks from Battistelli. This is for readers to judge:

DG3 nominees

Dear Mr Battistelli,

On 12.08.2014 you informed staff of your decision to reduce the “administrative tasks“ performed by the members of the Boards of Appeal and of the Enlarged Board of Appeal. The administrative tasks concerned are the participation in selection boards for procedures external to DG3 and in the work of other bodies under the Service Regulations. In practice, this decision heavily affects nominations in selection boards and in the Disciplinary Committee, where the staff representation used to rely on colleagues from DG3 to provide some independence in those procedures in the past.

As to the reasons, you referred to “possible consequences resulting from the discussion” on the interlocutory decision R 19/12 by the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

As we understand it, the Enlarged Board decided in decision R 19/12 that the obligation imposed on the Vice-President DG3 (VP3), when acting as a high-ranking officer directly under the President, to consider and support efficiency and productivity goals to be reached by the Office may conflict with his duty, when acting as a member of the Enlarged Board of Appeal, to review decisions of the Boards of Appeal as an independent judge and, in so-doing, to contribute to the development of the case law as regards the protection of the procedural rights of the parties. In other words, the Enlarged Board saw in decision R 19/12 a potential conflict of interest between VP3′s managerial and judicial responsibilities.

We do not see such a general potential conflict in the involvement of DG3 members in selection boards, in the Disciplinary Committee or in other bodies under the Service Regulations, essentially because DG3 members have no managerial responsibilities in other DGs.

We therefore respectfully ask to be informed why you consider decision R 19/12 to be relevant to their involvement in those tasks.

We further respectfully ask to be informed why you considered that the obligation to consult the General Consultative Committee in accordance with Article 38 ServRegs did not apply to your decision.

As we now know, this Disciplinary Committee became a farce around that time. Grant Philpott, a thin-skinned advocate of software patents with background in the British Army, was Chairman of the notorious Disciplinary Committee (which ILO deemed to be unsuitably composed months after its union-busting activities had ‘decapitated’ SUEPO).

Those who pretend that the boards were “asking for it” or deserved punishment engage in artistic revisionism of history. Battistelli never wanted them. He wanted to destroy them, having already destroyed several other auditory jobs.

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 Unified Patent Court (UPC) is Dead, But Spin From Team UPC is Now Abundant

    As we predicted, Team UPC is now denying the very facts about a German court agreeing to hear a major UPC complaint, exploiting blogs with a larger audience to spread falsehoods



  2. EPO Roundup: Low Profile, Employment Changes, Patent Trolls, Refusal to Obey Courts, and Animal Breeding Patents

    A few recent developments and observations regarding the European Patent Office (EPO), which is in a volatile state and is making no public statement about the future of staff ('canteen talk' now revolves around alleged deep cuts to staffing)



  3. Links 22/2/2018: Qt Roadmap for 2018, Calculate Linux 17.12.2

    Links for the day



  4. As Expected, Bristows and Others Already Lying About UPC Status in Germany, But Doing This Anonymously (to Dodge Accountability for Lies)

    In their characteristic fashion, firms that created the UPC for their self-enrichment purposes, along with publishers/writers who deem it their role to promote the UPC and set up lobbying events for the UPC, look for ways to downplay if not intentionally distort what happened in Germany yesterday



  5. Further Attacks on EPO Staff and the Appeal Boards; Former EPO Boards of Appeal Member Speaks About EPO Scandals

    In the process of devaluing EPO workers and perhaps preparing them for a large round of layoffs information is also revealed about further repressions against the independence of the Boards of Appeal



  6. End of the UPC Lobby and Withdrawal of UPCA May Seem Imminent

    The Unitary Patent fantasy (of mass litigation firms) is coming to an end; in fact, the German government and courts (Bundesverfassungsgericht to be specific) now deem the complaint to be admissible and thus likely legitimate in spite of many attempts to shoot it down



  7. EPO's Board 28 Spikes Article 53 in CA/3/18, Apparently After Battistelli Withdrew It

    The latest plot twist, as odd as that may seem, is that the attack on the rights of thousands of workers (many of whom are rumoured to be on their way out) is curtailed somewhat, at least for the time being



  8. Links 21/2/2018: Apper 1.0, New Fedora ISOs

    Links for the day



  9. Rumour: European Patent Office to Lay Off a Significant Proportion of Its Workforce

    While the Administrative Council of the EPO praises Battistelli for his financial accomplishments (as laughable as it may seem) a lot of families stuck in a foreign country may soon see their breadwinner unemployed, according to rumours



  10. The Patent Trolls' Lobby, Bristows and IAM Among Others, Downplays Darts-IP/IP2Innovate Report About Rising If Not Soaring Troll Activity in Europe

    Exactly like last year, as soon as IP2Innovate opens its mouth Bristows and IAM go into "attack dog" mode and promote the UPC, deny the existence or seriousness of patent trolls, and promote their nefarious, trolls-funded agenda



  11. Links 20/2/2018: Mesa 17.3.5, Qt 5.11 Alpha, Absolute 15.0 Beta 4, Sailfish OS 2.1.4 E.A., SuiteCRM 7.10

    Links for the day



  12. Replacing Patent Sharks/Trolls and the Patent Mafia With 'Icons' Like Thomas Edison

    The popular perceptions of patents and the sobering reality of what patents (more so nowadays) mean to actual inventors who aren't associated with global behemoths such as IBM or Siemens



  13. The Patent Trolls' Lobby is Distorting the Record of CAFC on PTAB

    The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), which deals with appeals from PTAB, has been issuing many decisions in favour of § 101, but those aren't being talked about or emphasised by the patent 'industry'



  14. Japan Demonstrates Sanity on SEP Policy While US Patent Policy is Influenced by Lobbyists

    Japan's commendable response to a classic pattern of patent misuse; US patent policy is still being subjected to never-ending intervention and there is now a lobbyist in charge of antitrust matters and a lawyer in charge of the US patent office (both Trump appointees)



  15. The Patent Microcosm's Embrace of Buzzwords and False Marketing Strives to Make Patent Examiners Redundant and Patent Quality Extremely Low

    Patent maximalists, who are profiting from abundance of low-quality patents (and frivolous lawsuits/legal threats these can entail), are riding the hype wave and participating in the rush to put patent systems at the hands of machines



  16. Today, at 12:30 CET, Bavarian State Parliament Will Speak About EPO Abuses (Updated)

    The politicians of Bavaria are prepared to wrestle with some serious questions about the illegality of the EPO's actions and what that may mean to constitutional aspects of German law



  17. Another Loud Warning From EPO Workers About the Decline of Patent Quality

    Yet more patent quality warnings are being issued by EPO insiders (examiners) who are seeing their senior colleagues vanishing and wonder what will be left of their employer



  18. Links 19/2/2018: Linux 4.16 RC2, Nintendo Switch Now Full-fledged GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  19. PTAB Continues to Invalidate a Lot of Software Patents and to Stop Patent Examiners From Issuing Them

    Erasure of software patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) carries on unabated in spite of attempts to cause controversy and disdain towards PTAB



  20. The Patent 'Industry' Likes to Mention Berkheimer and Aatrix to Give the Mere Impression of Section 101/Alice Weakness

    Contrary to what patent maximalists keep saying about Berkheimer and Aatrix (two decisions of the Federal Circuit from earlier this month, both dealing with Alice-type challenges), neither actually changed anything in any substantial way



  21. Makan Delrahim is Wrong; Patents Are a Major Antitrust Problem, Sometimes Disguised Using Trolls Somewhere Like the Eastern District of Texas

    Debates and open disagreements over the stance of the lobbyist who is the current United States Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division



  22. Patent Trolls Watch: Microsoft-Connected Intellectual Ventures, Finjan, and Rumour of Technicolor-InterDigital Buyout

    Connections between various patent trolls and some patent troll statistics which have been circulated lately



  23. Software Patents Trickle in After § 101/Alice, But Courts Would Not Honour Them Anyway

    The dawn of § 101/Alice, which in principle eliminates almost every software patent, means that applicants find themselves having to utilise loopholes to fool examiners, but that's unlikely to impress judges (if they ever come to assessing these patents)



  24. In Aatrix v Green Shades the Court is Not Tolerating Software Patents But Merely Inquires/Wonders Whether the Patents at Hand Are Abstract

    Aatrix alleges patent infringement by Green Shades, but whether the patents at hand are abstract or not remains to be seen; this is not what patent maximalists claim it to be ("A Valentine for Software Patent Owners" or "valentine for patentee")



  25. An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States

    The zealots who want to patent everything under the Sun and sue everyone under the Sun blame nations in the east (where the Sun rises) for all their misfortunes; this has reached somewhat ludicrous levels



  26. Berkheimer Decision is Still Being Spun by the Anti-Section 101/Alice Lobby

    12 days after Berkheimer v HP Inc. the patent maximalists continue to paint this decision as a game changer with regards to patent scope; the reality, however, is that this decision will soon be forgotten about and will have no substantial effect on either PTAB or Alice (because it's about neither of these)



  27. Academic Patent Immunity is Laughable and Academics Are Influenced by Corporate Money (for Steering Patent Agenda)

    Universities appear to have become battlegrounds in the war between practicing entities and a bunch of parasites who make a living out of litigation and patent bubbles



  28. UPC Optimism Languishes Even Among Paid UPC Propagandists Such as IAM

    Even voices which are attempting to give UPC momentum that it clearly lacks admit that things aren't looking well; the UK is not ratifying and Germany make take years to look into constitutional barriers



  29. Bejin Bieneman Props Up the Disgraced Randall Rader for Litigation Agenda

    Randall Rader keeps hanging out with the litigation 'industry' -- the very same 'industry' which he served in a closeted fashion when he was Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit (and vocal proponent of software patents, patent trolls and so on)



  30. With Stambler v Mastercard, Patent Maximalists Are Hoping to Prop Up Software Patents and Damage PTAB

    The patent 'industry' is hoping to persuade the highest US court to weaken the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), for PTAB is making patent lawsuits a lot harder and raises the threshold for patent eligibility


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