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

01.10.18

Benoît Battistelli Lies About Patent Quality; the Numbers Speak for Themselves However

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 7:17 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The number of European Patents (EPs) opposed has skyrocketed and may have outrun the capacity to properly deal with oppositions

The number of European Patents (EPs) opposed

Summary: The person who is rapidly ruining the quality that the EPO stood for over the years (nearly half a century) lies to his staff and stakeholders today; He has even, in his own words, “chaired our annual Quality Review” to review his own supposed ‘performance’

THE quality of patents at the Office of Benoît Battistelli is as high as the quality of the lies of Benoît Battistelli.

This Liar in Chief continued lying today; he spoke about patent quality yet again. He has lost any sense of shame and he now lies so blatantly that we can imagine the faces of EPO workers who read this ‘blog’ post of his (warning: epo.org link). It was promoted in the Organisation’s Twitter account some hours ago. “In a new blog post President Battistelli reviews 2017 and discusses the year ahead with a strong focus on quality,” it says. They too are lying. Yes, the Organisation. Does Herrnst care at all? Probably not because a few months ago he help defend the same lies about patent quality (in a private event that was publicly reported on). We suppose that a rebuttal to these lies is in order because staff must have noticed these lies. Someone ought to respond to the lies.

“He chairs a meeting in which to discuss himself.”Battistelli is (of course) lying. He chairs a meeting in which to discuss himself. How ludicrous is that? Napoleonic. “At the beginning of December,” he wrote, “I chaired our annual Quality Review, comprised of senior EPO management who are integral to maintaining and developing the Office’s quality.”

So Battistelli controls everything, even things that are tasked with assessing his performance. Amazing, isn’t it? Not at the EPO anyway; this has become the norm and something to be perpetually expected.

Is anyone out there surprised about it? Battistelli is moving his lips again, having returned from his (longer than other staff’s) break. His lips utter words, which leave an odorous puddle of lies afoot.

“Battistelli is moving his lips again, having returned from his (longer than other staff’s) break.”Let’s look at the latest evidence of a decline in patent quality (as the EPO itself is unable to safely investigate the matter; staff representatives who merely brought up the subject were severely reprimanded by two Vice-Presidents). Introspection verboten!

The EPO‘s Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) with Canada, which we mentioned on Tuesday morning, is now officially “news” (several days after it actually started). It comes from two publications that typically parrot EPO press releases [1, 2]. The first says this:

The European Patent Office (EPO) and the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) have extended a patent prosecution highway (PPH) pilot agreement.

The extension of the pilot, which allows applicants who have been successful in obtaining a patent at one office to request accelerated examination at the other, was announced on Friday, January 5.

For those who are not familiar with the concept, PPH will almost always guarantee lowered quality of assessment (and less time for oppositions etc.) in the name of speed, usually in order to better facilitate a patent aggressor rather than a defendant.

When you use the word “products” maybe you intentionally fail to understand what patents really are; so says the second ‘article’ (more like a press release):

Comparatively, the CIPO received 406 requests: 325 based on PCT work products and 81 based on regional work products.

Yes, “products”; Battistelli probably thinks that he is literally running a factory (something which he never did before by the way).

This is an utter embarrassment. PACE, Early Certainty, PPH and so on have basically demolished patent quality. The appeal boards have been systematically diminished (pure sabotage!) and see this new press release titled “European Patent Office Cancels Oral Opposition Proceedings Concerning Cantargia’s Patent for Solid Tumours” as it’s almost self-explanatory. It does not look like the EPO even has the capacity for quality assessment of patents anymore…

In the ongoing opposition proceedings at the European Patent Office (“EPO”) concerning Cantargia AB’s (“Cantargia”) patent for antibody treatment against IL1RAP in solid tumours the EPO has informed the company that the oral proceedings that were due to take place on 22 January 2018 have been cancelled.

Oppositions? What oppositions? The EPO cannot even keep up. Understaffed. Brain-drained. Total chaos.

“The EPO now grants far too many patents in error.”Great job, Battistelli!

The EPO now grants far too many patents in error. And its error-correcting mechanisms have been brought to their knees. Hours ago someone posted this detailed analysis which show how the number of oppositions has soared (indicative of plenty of ‘dissent’ or ‘protest’ against grants). To quote the relevant part (there is a graph there too):

Given the EPO opposition term of nine months from grant and given that by far the greater proportion of oppositions are filed towards the very end of the opposition term, increased grants could be expected to be followed nine months – three quarters of a year – later by an increase in the number of patents opposed.

Though the record of the number of patents opposed in the third quarter of 2017 is not yet finalized, it seems clear that this expected “more patents opposed” effect has occurred.

At the latest from the first quarter of 2017 there has been a marked increase in the number of patents opposed.

We are truly concerned that Battistelli basically ‘broke’ the EPO; everything that had evolved at the Organisation (and Office) to assure checks and balances, self-assessment etc. is now gone. When we publish old documents from staff representatives we gradually go back in time and show how Battistelli did it, scuttling everything that constitutes separation of powers. It’s disturbing. And it’s a good thing that some people meticulously documented these things over the year.

“When we publish old documents from staff representatives we gradually go back in time and show how Battistelli did it, scuttling everything that constitutes separation of powers.”The other day Alexander Esslinger wrote about the Organisation’s Enlarged Board of Appeal and German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ): (see corresponding tweet)

The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) reasoned that such undisclosed disclaimers in most cases constitute added matter, i.e. “the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC leave virtually no chance of an undisclosed disclaimer being allowable” since “introducing any disclaimer per definitionem excludes subject-matter from a claim and, hence, changes the technical content of the claim” (G1-16, point 42). The EBO allowed undisclosed disclaimers under the above-mentioned clearly defined conditions despite the fact that they violate Art. 123(2) EPC, because under these circumstances a violation of Art. 123(2) EPC would not give the patentee or applicant an unwarranted advantage damaging to the legal security of third parties; this being the rationale behind Art. 123(2) EPC (G1-16, point 36).

The German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ), however, applies in the recently published ex-parte decision “Phosphatidylcholin” a different reasoning. In the case the FCJ had to decide upon an appeal on points of law (“Rechtsbeschwerde”) of the applicant of a patent application, which has been rejected both by the GPTO and the Federal Patent Court based on the ground that of an undisclosed disclaimer consisted of an inadmissible extension beyond the content of the original application.

We previously posted evidence that GPTO (in relation to SLAPP, trolls, and quality of patents) had become better than EPO. Where is the EPO going if the Boards of Appeal are being crushed (and shrunk) further and further? Who is going to independently assess patent quality?

German media will look the other way, perhaps because the EPO is a sacred cow (cash cow).

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. Links 16/12/2018: DXVK 0.94, WordPress 5.0.1, Fuchsia SDK

    Links for the day



  2. Immunity of the European Patent Office Has Helped Shield Dangerous Thugs From Justice

    The Topić case is set to resume in Croatia as Topić runs out of diplomatic immunity he long enjoyed (and exploited) at the European Patent Office



  3. Patent Law Firms' War on Facts and Constant Lying About Unitary Patent

    The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) has failed; this, however, is no excuse for constantly lying and it's a problem more people ought to speak about because it stigmatises lawyers as self-serving liars, not a legitimate source of honest legal advice



  4. EPO Chief Economist Yann Ménière Keynote Speaker at Patent Trolls-Funded Event Set Up by the Patent Trolls' Lobby

    The EPO continues to align itself not only with the interests of patent trolls (even those from another continent) but also with the trolls themselves, causing great embarrassment and confusion over the goals/motivations of the Office



  5. The European Patent Organisation (EPO) Loses Legitimacy If (or When) Christoph Ernst Becomes Subservient to António Campinos

    The structural deficiencies of the EPO, where separation of powers does not quite exist, is further pronounced by the imminent role of Christoph Ernst, who gets 'demoted' from pseudo-boss of Campinos to a mere assistant of his



  6. Links 15/12/2018: Cockpit 184, Vivaldi 2.2, Krita 4.1.7 Released

    Links for the day



  7. Links 13/12/2018: IRS Migration, GNOME 3.31.3 Released

    Links for the day



  8. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decisions Still Uncontroversial Unless One Asks the Patent Maximalists

    Contrary to what the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has claimed, PTAB is liked by companies that actually create things and opposition to PTAB comes from power brokers of the Koch brothers, law firms, and trolls (including those who foolishly repeat them)



  9. Latest Talk From IBM’s Manny Schecter Shows That IBM Hasn't Changed and After the Red Hat Takeover It'll Continue to Promote Software Patents

    IBM's hardheaded attitude and patent aggression unaffected by its strategic acquisition of a company that at least claimed to oppose software patents (whilst at the same time pursuing them)



  10. The European Patent Troll Wants as Much Litigation as Possible

    Patent quality is a concept no longer recognisable at the European Patent Office; all that the management understands is speed and PACE, which it conflates with quality in order to register as much cash as possible before the whole thing comes crashing down (bubbles always implode at the end)



  11. António Campinos Turns His 'Boss' Into His Lapdog, Just Like Battistelli and Kongstad

    The European Patent Organisation expects us to believe that Josef Kratochvíl will keep the Office honest while his predecessor, the German who failed to do anything about Battistelli's abuses, becomes officially subservient to António Campinos



  12. Links 12/12/2018: Mesa 18.3.1 Released, CNCF Takes Control of etcd

    Links for the day



  13. EPO Trust, Leadership and Commitment

    "Trust, leadership and commitment" is the latest publication from EPO insiders, who in the absence of free speech and freedom of association for the union/representation are an essential spotlight on EPO abuses



  14. Links 11/12/2018: Tails 3.11, New Firefox, FreeBSD 12.0

    Links for the day



  15. Number of Filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Highest in Almost Two Years

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs), which [cref 113718 typically invalidate software patents by citing 35 U.S.C. § 101], are withstanding negative rhetoric and hostility from Iancu



  16. With 'Brexit' in a Lot of Headlines Team UPC Takes the Unitary Patent Lies up a Notch

    Misinformation continues to run like water; people are expected to believe that the UPC, an inherently EU-centric construct, can magically come to fruition in the UK (or in Europe as a whole)



  17. The EPO Not Only Abandoned the EPC But Also the Biotech Directive

    Last week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first placeLast week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first place



  18. Patents on Abstract Things and on Life (or Patents Which Threaten Lives) Merely Threaten the Very Legitimacy of Patent Offices, Including EPO

    Patent Hubris and maximalism pose a threat or a major risk to the very system that they claim to be championing; by reducing the barrier to entry (i.e. introducing low-quality or socially detrimental patents) they merely embolden ardent critics who demand patent systems as a whole be abolished; the EPO is nowadays a leading example of it



  19. Links 10/12/2018: Linux 4.20 RC6 and Git 2.20

    Links for the day



  20. US Courts Make the United States' Patent System Sane Again

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and other factors are making the patent system in the US a lot more sane



  21. Today's USPTO Grants a Lot of Fake Patents, Software Patents That Courts Would Invalidate

    The 35 U.S.C. § 101 effect is very much real; patents on abstract/nonphysical ideas get invalidated en masse (in courts/PTAB) and Director Andrei Iancu refuses to pay attention as if he's above the law and court rulings don't apply to him



  22. A Month After Microsoft Claimed Patent 'Truce' Its Patent Trolls Keep Attacking Microsoft's Rivals

    Microsoft's legal department relies on its vultures (to whom it passes money and patents) to sue its rivals; but other than that, Microsoft is a wonderful company!



  23. Good News: US Supreme Court Rejects Efforts to Revisit Alice, Most Software Patents to Remain Worthless

    35 U.S.C. § 101 will likely remain in tact for a long time to come; courts have come to grips with the status quo, as even the Federal Circuit approves the large majority of invalidations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) panels, initiated by inter partes reviews (IPRs)



  24. Florian Müller's Article About SEPs and the EPO

    Report from the court in Munich, where the EPO is based



  25. EPO Vice-President Željko Topić in New Article About Corruption in Croatia

    The Croatian newspaper 7Dnevno has an outline of what Željko Topić has done in Croatia and in the EPO in Munich; it argues that this seriously erodes Croatia's national brand/identity



  26. The Quality of European Patents Continues to Deteriorate Under António Campinos and Software Patents Are Advocated Every Day

    The EPC in the European Patent Office and 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the USPTO annul most if not all software patents; under António Campinos, however, software patents are being granted in Europe and the USPTO exploits similar tricks



  27. Team UPC is Still Spreading False Rumours in an Effort to Trick Politicians and Pressure Judges

    Abuses at the European Patent Office, political turmoil and an obvious legislative coup by a self-serving occupation that produces nothing have already doomed the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); so now we deal with complete fabrications from Team UPC as they're struggling to make something out of nothing, anonymously smearing opposition to the UPC and anonymously making stuff up



  28. Patents on Life and Patents That Kill the Poor Would Only Delegitimise the European Patent Office

    After Mayo, Myriad and other SCOTUS cases (the basis of 35 U.S.C. § 101) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is reluctant to grant patents on life; the European Patent Office (EPO), however, goes in the opposite direction, even in defiance of the European Patent Convention



  29. EPO 'Untapped Potential'

    "Campinos is diligently looking for ways to further increase the Office’s output without increasing the number of examiners," says the EPO-FLIER team



  30. Links 9/12/2018: New Linux Stable Releases (Notably Linux 4.19.8), RC Coming, and Unifont 11.0.03

    Links for the day


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