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

10.02.19

EPO Releases Decision Regarding G 2/19 (the ‘Haar Question’) in a Language Only About 10% of Member States Speak

Posted in Europe, Law, Patents at 2:37 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

What a classy move!

Document dump
Reference: Document dump

Summary: The European Patent Office (EPO) discloses its controversial judgment in a relatively minimal form and in a language that suits people in Germany and Austria; they don’t want people to notice that all EPO judgments for a number of years were likely illegal (in defiance of the European Patent Convention (“EPC”))

THE PREVIOUS POST ended with a mention of the “Guidelines for Search and Examination at the EPO,” by which the EPO hopes to grant software patents through buzzwords. But there’s an even worse aspect; the judges of the EPO lack independence and the EPO isn’t doing anything to correct this.

“…the judges of the EPO lack independence and the EPO isn’t doing anything to correct this.”Promoted via Lexology was this new article by Potter Clarkson LLP’s Tony Proctor. He wrote about the EPO’s Boards of Appeal, which have no independence whatsoever (this whole system is rogue now), and this is what he had to say about “Changes to the Rules of Procedure of the EPO Boards of Appeal”: (notice nothing at all is being done regarding much-needed autonomy)

The rules governing the appeals process at the European Patent Office are being changed, with the aim being to speed up the appeals process and the expected effect being to reduce flexibility for appellants. Here we discuss the expected knock-on effects on first instance proceedings, particularly oppositions, as well as on existing and new appeals.

There’s still high-level EPO corruption that ensures judges are indebted to (and afraid of) the Office — the very authority that they were created to scrutinise rather than guard. Just published in German was this decision with “full reasoning in G2/19″. Why only in German? Big Phrama blogger Rose Hughes (Patent Attorney at AstraZeneca) wrote: “This Kat is therefore currently forced to rely on the EPO summary.”

The EPO is, as usual, making it harder for people to see its coverup of sheer corruption, subversion of justice and so on. When the case went on the EPO posted a whole bunch of distractions. The EPO was gaming the media and nobody but us covered it at the end. “The appeal was considered inadmissible,” as noted below:

The EPO has announced the issue of the Enlarged Board of Appeal’s full reasoning in referral G 2/19. As previously noted on IPKat, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) had previously released their decision in G 2/19 but had not published the decision (EPO press release).

The referral originated from the Board of Appeal decision T 831/17. The appeal related to a case in which a third party had submitted observations pursuant to Article 115 EPC that a patent application (EP2378735) lacked clarity. Clarity is not a ground for opposition. The third party was therefore not able to oppose the subsequently granted patent on the same ground.

In order to pursue their clarity objection to the now granted patent, the third party filed an appeal against the decision to grant. The appeal was considered inadmissible. The Board of Appeal also referred the question to the EBA of whether the right to oral proceedings in appeal proceedings is limited if the appeal is evidently inadmissible. The referral also asked the question of whether the relocation of the Boards of Appeal to outside Munich contravened a party’s right to be heard.

Prior to the decision, the Haar/Munich aspect of the referral was covered by IPKat here, and the oral proceedings issue was covered in more detail here. The referral attracted a number of amicus curiae, including submissions from EPI and CIPA.

[...]

The G 2/19 decision is currently only available in German. This Kat is therefore currently forced to rely on the EPO summary. Stay tuned to IPKat for further commentary once an English translation becomes available.

This is pretty astounding. For a number of years the EPO issued a lot of judgments in a court whose existence (in this particular form) violates the EPC and they refuse to even deal with that issue.

“The EPO bullies its staff. The majority of them have rather severe stress, many need to seek professional help and a large proportion develop physical problems that are chronic.”This is typical EPO. It’s a bully, a thug, and a foe of justice. Just ask its own staff; no, not the mythical staff the EPO has just promoted (“How do our #patent examiners work?”).

The EPO bullies its staff. The majority of them have rather severe stress, many need to seek professional help and a large proportion develop physical problems that are chronic. The EPO is no place to work and it’s not hiring. It’s also outsourcing the jobs.

Incidentally, retweeted by EPO a short while ago was this tweet from Saudi Arabia: “The bilateral meeting between @SAIPKSA and the European Patent Office(EPO)was held today in Geneva.The two sides reviewed aspects of cooperation in the field of patents and the opportunities of enhancing the strategic partnership between the sides.”

“Even EPO staff that complains isn’t being listened to. It’s like these people don’t matter because they interfere with ‘Big Litigation’ agenda.”I responded by saying that it makes perfect sense for EPO to have alliances with countries that chop people like me to pieces and put them in tandoori ovens (for speaking about injustices like those in EPO).

Sadly, most if not all of the above issues are no longer discussed by the media. The EPC being violated should be front page news, but somehow that’s being ignored. What do so-called ‘law’ firms speak about? Nothing but marketing or shameless self-promotion; in this particular case we have Paul Calvo and Fei Sha (Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.) citing the EPC as if it still matters at the EPO. But it doesn’t. They would be wiser to point out EPO violates the European Patent Convention (“EPC”) every day. From their new article:

The Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office (EPO) permit the use of post-filing experimental data in a limited manner to support the scope of objected claims. However, reliance on post-filing data differs when claims are objected to for insufficiency of disclosure or lack of inventive step.

Sufficiency of Disclosure

Article 83 of the European Patent Convention (“EPC”) requires European patent applications to “disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art.” A single example may suffice, but for claims that cover a broad field, a patent application must disclose multiple examples or describe alternative embodiments or variations extending over the technical area encompassed by the claims. If a patent specification lacks disclosure of tangible proof that the claimed concept can be put into practice, post-published documents can confirm the teachings of a patent application, but cannot be used to “cure” an insufficiency in disclosure.[1]

For example, if a patent disclosure provides no guidance as to how to perform a particular aspect of a claimed invention, post-published documents that later show how such performance is accomplished cannot “cure” the insufficiency.[2] In addition, if a patent specification provides only a vague indication of possible medical use for a yet-to-be-identified chemical compound, post-published documents containing details as to the identity and medical use of the compound cannot remedy the insufficiency of disclosure.[3] However, where an application lacks such explicit data, but discloses a technical concept that is plausible in view of common general knowledge at the relevant filing date, post-published documents may be used to support sufficiency of disclosure.[4]

Notice how they examine little details while ignoring all the big questions and the severe issues; this has become so typical that it’s almost sickening. Even EPO staff that complains isn’t being listened to. It’s like these people don’t matter because they interfere with ‘Big Litigation’ agenda.

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 19/1/2020: Wine 5.0 RC6, Alpine 3.11.3

    Links for the day



  2. Judges Reject EPO Patents on Life as Constitutional Complaints Against the EPO Pile Up in Germany

    EPO judges throw out patents on life (CRISPR at least); there's now growing hope that they'll have the courage to do the same to patents on software



  3. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, January 18, 2020

    IRC logs for Saturday, January 18, 2020



  4. StartPage (System1) Found New Spin Allies. Some Have Been Offered StartPage Jobs. Some Might Already be Working for StartPage in Secret.

    Pro-StartPage voices appear to be paid (or have been promised pay) by StartPage; the key strategy of StartPage seems to be, attack and betray people's privacy while paying people in particular positions to pretend otherwise



  5. IRC Proceedings: Friday, January 17, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, January 17, 2020



  6. Links 18/1/2020: Mir 1.7 and GNU Guile 3.0.0

    Links for the day



  7. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, January 16, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, January 16, 2020



  8. Links 16/1/2020: Mozilla Layoffs, PinePhone Braveheart Shipping, KDE Plasma 5.18 LTS Reaches Beta

    Links for the day



  9. Microsoft is a Market Leader in Lying and Corruption

    Microsoft is working hard to describe itself as the exact opposite of what it is and what it has been; ‘Internet rot’ helps a lot with this agenda, not to mention control of the media (the narrative)



  10. The European Patent Organisation Continues to 'Piss All Over' Separation of Powers

    The EPO continues to scatter invalid patents (IPs) that are European Patents (EPs) all over Europe and nobody can stop this, not even the judges of the EPO because they lack independence (by their very own admission)



  11. Zealots of Team UPC (Patent Litigation) Now Attacking the Courts and the Judges, Removing Their Mask on the Face of Things...

    The tactics of Team UPC aren't changing, only the shamelessness associated with these tactics is changing (because it looks like the end of days to them)



  12. Microsoft Now Uses or Leverages Software Freedom Against Free Software

    A reader's explanation of what Microsoft is trying to accomplish with its so-called 'embrace' and what steps will come next (how they manifest themselves)



  13. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, January 15, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, January 15, 2020



  14. Links 15/1/2020: CentOS Linux 8.1, Oracle VirtualBox 6.1.2 and GNU Sed 4.8

    Links for the day



  15. OSI Board at Microsoft: This is How Institutions Die or Completely Lose Their Purpose/Direction

    The photo (or meeting) may mark the turning point of the Openwashing as-a-Standard Initiative (OSI), which less than a year earlier took a bucket of money from Microsoft



  16. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 14, 2020

    IRC logs for Tuesday, January 14, 2020



  17. When Microsoft's Actions Speak for Themselves (About Back Door Access)

    Unwittingly, people are being reminded of the 'special relationship' between Microsoft and the US Army (or government); The back doors or bug doors are still there, even 7 years after Edward Snowden's NSA leaks



  18. Why You -- Yes, You Too -- Should Consider Migrating to GNU/Linux

    The window is closing (and Windows/Vista 7 closing down); the chance to use machines that the users actually control is still there



  19. Can We Please Stop Lying for Microsoft in the Mainstream Media?

    Dishonesty for short-term financial gain (e.g. advertising money) will be a big loss in the long run. There’s a reason why so many news sites perish and Datamation (where I wrote more than a decade ago) now throws away remnants of reputation by spreading a big lie from Microsoft.



  20. It's Only Factual and Truthful to Point Out That About Half of the EPO's Management Committee Are From the President's Nation (and Many Are Underqualified Friends of His)

    The patent-granting extravaganza of what a reader and contributor of ours likes to call "Club Med" will result in great pain (not just for the Office but for Europe as a whole); pointing out who's to blame (the culprits) is an exercise in practicality



  21. Stranger Than Fiction: Team UPC's Mental Condition

    Team UPC's delusions continue to unmask UPC proponents (in 2020) as totally and entirely detached from reality



  22. Links 14/1/2020: IBM Joins LOT Network; X.Org Server 1.20.7, Tails 4.2.2 and Zanshin 0.5.71 Released

    Links for the day



  23. Vista 7 is Dead, Long Live GNU/Linux

    A reminder of Microsoft’s universal “PC tax” ambitions — evidence that the company was never interested in ‘playing nice’ with anybody



  24. Links 14/1/2020: Git v2.25.0 and End of Vista 7

    Links for the day



  25. Systematic Abandonment of the Independence of Judiciary at the EPO (or Collective Amnesia)

    The ‘constitution’ or the convention upon which the EPO is based (known as EPC) is routinely violated and nobody seems to care anymore; the EPO governs itself and conducts itself without as much as a fundamental legal text



  26. They Always Say They Love Linux (and 'the Children')

    Microsoft says it “loves Linux” and the Gates Foundation insists it “loves children” but the real underlying motivations have more to do with monopoly (Windows, Monsanto etc.) and nothing to do with “Linux” or “children” or whatever



  27. The Media's Obligation is Not to Repeat the Lies of EPO Management, But Money Changes Things

    The ridiculous lies about prospects of the Unified Patent Court are now spreading to EPO-friendly publishers — few powerful people to whom truth isn’t valued as much as the customers (their subscribers and sponsors are law firms)



  28. IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 13, 2020

    IRC logs for Monday, January 13, 2020



  29. The FSF and GNU Need a Better Savannah to Attract GitHub Refugees

    Thomas Grzybowski's explanation of why GitHub poses a risk to software freedom and what can be done about it



  30. Links 13/1/2020: Linux Lite 4.8, Linux 5.5 RC6, Corebird Continues as ‘Cawbird’

    Links for the day


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