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


Benoît Battistelli and Confidants Like Bergot Want to Make a Lot of EPO Staff Redundant Without the Staff Ever Noticing

Posted in Europe, Patents at 12:38 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Gagging unions and representatives is the first phase

Old: Battistelli Puts ‘Team Battistelli’ in Charge of ‘Scrutinising’ His Proposals

Downsizing not due to automation but because of greed that lowered patent quality and repelled applicants (now being offered ‘discounts’ to still entice them, after the number of applications dropped)

Summary: The EPO’s (Organisation) Boards Of Appeal are not being replaced by UPC (as UPC fails to arrive), but staff of the EPO (Office) now faces the prospect of mass layoffs, before or just after the arrival of President Campinos

THE future of the EPO does not look bright. The EPO, in our humble assessment, is changing the rules to facilitate upcoming layoffs with the Council’s consent. This is clearly not what examiners signed up for. Who would trust EPO after that?

“This is clearly not what examiners signed up for.”There’s 'peak censorship' at the EPO right now; even staff representatives are being gagged. They’re not really allowed to speak to staff whom they represent. Flow of information is being suppressed if not cut.

Just before the media was taken over by the EPO’s PR department with external help (more on that in our next post), World Intellectual Property Review (WIPR) published this article about a provision to lay off any EPO member of staff (living abroad with family) instantaneously (like Battistelli intended):

European Patent Office (EPO) president Benoît Battistelli has ensured that a controversial term in an employment proposal has been dropped, just weeks before the EPO’s supervisory body, the Administrative Council (AC), will deliberate the plan.

Battistelli and Elodie Bergot, principal director of human resources, had added a motion to discuss the plan to recruit staff on renewable contracts of five years during a budget and finance committee meeting in October last year.

A first discussion of the proposal, which is called the “Modernisation of the employment framework of the EPO”, took place during the AC’s meeting in December.

It was then amended to include article 53(1)(f) of the EPO’s Service Regulations, which read: “Without prejudice to the expiry of a fixed-term appointment in the same circumstances, the appointing authority may decide to terminate the service of an employee: … (f) if the exigencies of the service require abolition of their post or a reduction of staff.”

The removal of this provision is almost a Pyrrhic victory because what remains is still very harmful to staff. It’s Battistelli’s infamous negotiation tactic wherein he asks for something very extreme and at the end makes “concessions” that still leave a pretty radical proposal in tact. We wrote about this before. It’s not the first time. Based on what sources told us, the removal of this provision was Battistelli's own action. Maybe it’s the strategy he had all along (giving staff the mere impression that they accomplish a “compromise”).

“In 2016 it was projected that layoffs would start some time around 2018.”We don’t intend to frustrate or depress staff; we’re just trying to be realistic here. It looks like the media lost its tongue and EPO insiders are too afraid to speak out in this current, hostile climate. Regarding layoffs, these were foreseen in 2016 by staff representatives [1, 2]. Most staff is already aware of it. In 2016 it was projected that layoffs would start some time around 2018.

It’s worth noting that Britain’s national patent office (UK-IPO) advertised jobs recently; it’s hiring. It was also making jokes about patents on snow the other day. Back in 2016 we reported that EPO recruitment of Brits had gone down by 80% and sources inside the EPO are concerned that hiring standards collapsed under Bergot (working conditions also). What is the EPO becoming? It can barely attract people who are required to move (relocation to another country).

Regarding the Boards of Appeal, yesterday the EPO wrote again: “Here’s how you can have your say on proposed changes to the Rules of Procedure of our Boards of Appeal.”

“The Boards of Appeal are constantly complaining that they self-censor and cannot rule independently from the Office (without ramifications/dangers to their career).”As we said before, they try to give the bogus impression that the public is participating. In reality, however, the Boards of Appeal have been under unprecedented attacks from Battistelli, who thought they would be scuttled by the UPC. But it’s not happening, is it? So now we have neither a UPC nor a truly functional venue for appeals. The Boards of Appeal are constantly complaining that they self-censor and cannot rule independently from the Office (without ramifications/dangers to their career).

A few hours ago John Leeming from J A Kemp wrote about where Boards of Appeal stand on software patents (they should all be denied).

I wrote to the Boards of Appeal about it in the past, but now that they’re living in fear of Battistelli (who openly supports software patents) can we truly expect them to do what’s right? Leeming wrote:

2017 was a year of change for the Boards of Appeal of the EPO: a new President and a move out of the EPO’s oldest building in the centre of Munich to a suburb, Haar. There has been some recruitment, but overall it appears there are still many vacancies on various Boards. Overall the relevant Boards issued 10% more decisions than in 2016 and Board 3.5.01 in particular has significantly increased its output in the latter part of the year as it now has a chairman.

The so-called “Comvik” approach to mixed inventions has been applied consistently, with Board 3.5.01 introducing the “notional business person” to help distinguish between technical features – which can contribute to inventive step – and non-technical features – which can’t. Nevertheless, the presence of non-technical features in a claim remains a strong predictor of rejection.

This paper reviews notable decisions published in 2017 by the “electrical” Technical Boards of Appeal (Boards 3.5.01, 03, 04, 05, 06 and 07), which most often handle software related inventions, excluding Board 3.5.02 which mostly handles electrical components and hardware.

While we’re sympathetic towards the Boards, historically they have been very much akin to patent maximalists and their rulings went in favour of Battistelli. In his last bit of work (in his capacity as a judge) Patrick Corcoran rejected a software patent of a massive American (US) company that is connected to the EPO. Was the house ban potentially retribution for his stance? Whatever information he was accused of transmitting had already been disseminated by many other members of staff, as we noted here in the past. Why was it him who got targeted and isolated by illegal surveillance? We might never know and it’s likely just a “coincidence” as Minnoye might put it.

A few days ago there was also this article by Ping Li and Olga Bezzubova (Jones Day). It was about the Enlarged Board of Appeal and it said:

A recent decision by the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office confirmed that a 2011 ruling dealing with disclosed disclaimers does not overrule its 2004 decision applying to undisclosed disclaimers.


With its decision in G 1/16, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (“EBA”) of the European Patent Office (“EPO”) clarifies that its 2011 decision in G 2/10 dealing with disclosed disclaimers does not overrule its 2004 decision in G 1/03 that applies to undisclosed disclaimers.


1. The G 1/16 decision confirms that “undisclosed disclaimers” fulfilling the criteria set out in G 1/03 do not introduce added matter.

This case was mentioned here before. It’s a bit old. How long before Battistelli and/or Campinos (Battistelli put him in place and will likely have leverage over him even after his tenure ends) attempt scuttle the Enlarged Board of Appeal along with the other boards? Perhaps as they intended all along? They already put the Board in a building that is not the EPO’s and is basically rented space (as though it was temporary).

Is there a future for the EPO? EPO insiders are actually more negative than us. Some have begun assessing/planning their post-EPO career, assuming — as more EPO insiders do — that the first round of layoffs is coming.

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

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

What Else is New

  1. Links 18/3/2018: Wine 3.4, Wine-Staging 3.4, KDE Connect 1.8 for Android

    Links for the day

  2. TXED Courts Are Causing Businesses to Leave the District, Notably For Fear That Having Any Operations Based There is a Legal Liability

    A discussion about the infamous abundance of patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas (TXED/EDTX) and what this will mean for businesses that have branches or any form of operations there (making them subjected to lawsuits in that district even after TC Heartland)

  3. PTAB Hatred is So Intense Among the Patent 'Industry' That Even Scammers Are Hailed as Champions If They Target PTAB

    The patent microcosm is so eager to stop the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that it's supporting sham deals (or "scams") and exploits/distorts the voice of the new USPTO Director to come up with PTAB-hostile catchphrases

  4. The Patent 'Industry' is Increasingly Mocking CAFC and Its Judges Because It Doesn't Like the Decisions

    Judgmental patent maximalists are still respecting high courts only when it suits them; whenever the outcome is not desirable they're willing to attack the legitimacy of the courts and the competence of judges, even resorting to racist ad hominem attacks if necessary

  5. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Carries on Enforcing § 101, Invalidating Software Patents and Upsetting the Patent 'Industry' in the Process

    A quick report on where PTAB stands at the moment, some time ahead of the Oil States decision (soon to come from the US Supreme Court)

  6. Luxembourg Can Become a Hub of Patent Trolls If the EPO Carries on With Its 'Reforms', Even Without the UPC

    With or without the Unified Patent Court (UPC), which is the wet dream of patent trolls and their legal representatives, the EPO's terrible policies have landed a lot of low-quality patents on the hands of patent trolls (many of which operate through city-states that exist for tax evasion -- a fiscal environment ripe for shells)

  7. The Patent 'Printing Machine' of the EPO Will Spawn Many Lawsuits and Extortions (Threats of Lawsuits), in Effect Taxing Europe

    The money-obsessed, money-printing patent office, where the assembly line mentality has been adopted and patent-printing management is in charge, is devaluing or diluting the pool of European Patents, more so with restrictions (monetary barriers) to challenging bad patents

  8. Links 17/3/2018: Varnish 6, Wine 3.4

    Links for the day

  9. Deleted EPO Tweets and Promotion of Software Patents Amid Complaints About Abuse and Demise of Patent Quality

    Another ordinary day at the EPO with repressions of workforce, promotion of patents that aren't even allowed, and Team UPC failing to get its act together

  10. Guest Post: Suspected “Whitewashing” Operations by Željko Topić in Croatia

    Articles about EPO Vice-President Željko Topić are disappearing and sources indicate that it’s a result of yet more SLAPP from him

  11. Monumental Effort to Highlight Decline in Quality of European Patents (a Quarter of Examiners Sign Petition in Spite of Fear), Yet Barely Any Press Coverage

    he media in Europe continues to be largely apathetic towards the EPO crisis, instead relaying a bunch of press releases and doctored figures from the EPO; only blogs that closely follow EPO scandals bothered mentioning the new petition

  12. Careful Not to Conflate UPC Critics With AfD or Anti-EU Elements

    The tyrannical Unified Patent Court (UPC) is being spun as something that only fascists would oppose after the right-wing, anti-EU politicians in Germany express strong opposition to it

  13. Links 15/3/2018: Qt Creator 4.6 RC, Microsoft Openwashing

    Links for the day

  14. PTAB Continues to Increase Capacity Ahead of Oil States; Patent Maximalists Utterly Upset

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) sees the number of filings up to an almost all-time high and efforts to undermine PTAB are failing pretty badly -- a trend which will be further cemented quite soon when the US Supreme Court (quite likely) backs the processes of PTAB

  15. Patent Maximalists Are Still Trying to Create a Patent Bubble in India

    Litigation maximalists and patent zealots continue to taunt India, looking for an opportunity to sue over just about anything including abstract ideas because that's what they derive income from

  16. EPO Staff Has Just Warned the National Delegates That EPO's Decline (in Terms of Patent Quality and Staff Welfare) Would Be Beneficial to Patent Trolls

    The staff of the EPO increasingly recognises the grave dangers of low-quality patents -- an issue we've written about (also in relation to the EPO) for many years

  17. The EPO is a Mess Under Battistelli and Stakeholders Including Law Firms Will Suffer, Not Just EP Holders

    As one last 'gift' from Battistelli, appeals are becoming a lot more expensive -- the very opposite of what he does to applications, in effect ensuring a sharp increase in wrongly-granted patents

  18. The EPO Under Battistelli Has Become Like China Under Xi and CPC

    The EPO is trying very hard to silence not only the union but also staff representatives; it's evidently worried that the lies told by Team Battistelli will be refuted and morale be affected by reality

  19. Links 14/3/2018: IPFire 2.19 – Core Update 119, Tails 3.6

    Links for the day

  20. Links 13/3/2018: Qt Creator 4.5.2, Tails 3.6, Firefox 59

    Links for the day

  21. Willy Minnoye (EPO) Threatened Staff With Disabilities Said to Have Been Caused by the EPO Work Pressures

    Willy Minnoye, or Battistelli's 'deputy' at the EPO until last year, turns out to have misused powers (and immunity) to essentially bully vulnerable staff

  22. IAM and IBM Want Lots of Patent Litigation in India

    Having 'championed' lobbying for litigation Armageddon in China (where IBM's practicing business units have gone), patent maximalists set their eyes on India

  23. The Patent Trolls' Lobby (IAM) Already Pressures Andrei Iancu, Inciting a USPTO Director Against PTAB

    Suspicions that Iancu might destroy the integrity of the Office for the sake of the litigation ‘industry’ may be further reaffirmed by the approach towards patent maximalists from IAM, who also participated in the shaming of his predecessor, Michelle Lee, and promoted a disgraced judge (and friend of patent trolls) for her then-vacant role

  24. Patent Trolls in the United States Increasingly Target Small Businesses Which Cannot Challenge Their Likely-Invalid Software Patents

    South by Southwest (SXSW Conference/Festivals in Austin, Texas) has a presentation about patent trolls, whose general message may be reaffirmed by recent legal actions in Texas and outside Texas

  25. EPO Staff Union Organises Protest to Complain About Inability “of the Office to Recruit the Highly Qualified Staff it Needs.”

    Having already targeted union leaders and staff representatives, the EPO may soon be going after those whom they passionately represented and the staff union (SUEPO) wants the Administrative Council to be aware

  26. Battistelli Likes to Describe His Critics as 'Nazis', Team UPC Will Attempt the Same Thing Against UPC Critics

    Demonising one's opposition or framing it as "fascist" is a classic trick; to what degree will Team UPC exploit such tactics?

  27. Session in Bavaria to Discuss the Abuses of the European Patent Office Later Today

    The EPO shambles in Munich have gotten the attention of more Bavarian politicians, more so in light of the Constitutional complaint against the UPC (now dealt with by the German FCC, which saw merit in the complaint)

  28. Links 12/3/2018: Linux 4.16 RC5, KEXI 3.1, Karton 1.0, Netrunner 18.03, Debian 9.4

    Links for the day

  29. EPO Patent 'Growth' Not Achieved But Demanded/Mandated by Battistelli, by Lowering Quality of Patents/Services

    Targets at the EPO are not actually reached but are being imposed by overzealous management which dries up all the work in a hurry in order to make examiners redundant and many European Patents worthless

  30. Doubt Over Independence of Judges at the EPO Clouds Reason in Deciding Regarding Patents on Life

    With the growing prospect of a Board of Appeal (BoA) having to decide on patentability of CRISPR 'innovation' (more like explanation/discovery), questions linger or persist about judges' ability to rule as they see fit rather than what some lunatic wants


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


Recent Posts