"When one does not engage in misconduct one does not need to lie (or cover things up)."It was last week that this tweet from an apparent USPTO insider said: "We continue to get a large number of e-mails about the hiring of one certain minority group within OPG and AED. It seems Owens and Chiles were not the only ones’ capable of hiring incompetence. Query the Org Chart for CIO and you will see just by names alone. Mr. Steckler?"
I have been covering USPTO affairs for a long time and I did not see much corruption/abuse there. It was a lot more subtle where it did exist. The closest thing to a scandal seemed the lobbying career of former officials such as David Kappos. Then there's the nepotism which the above insider/USPTO whistleblower keeps speaking of (appointment of a relative by marital/spousal connection to a top position).
“I have been covering USPTO affairs for a long time and I did not see much corruption/abuse there.”Compare that to EPO scandals. There are so many of them that we have something to cover almost every day. Märpel, apparently an EPO insider, has just published "A judge and no legal system" in relation to ILO and the EPO. To quote some bits:
Judgment 3961 concerns President Battistelli publication of the details of the pending proceedings against Mr. Corcoran in the EPO and in the press. AT-ILO finds that "the complainant has no right to request the initiation of an investigation against another staff member". The complaint is dismissed. Basically, the decision implies complete immunity of EPO officials: they cannot be fought in external tribunals and Judgment 3961 also makes it clear that they cannot be fought in the EPO internal justice system either.
Judgment 3959 concerns the confiscation of a private USB stick. AT-ILO finds the complaint to be irrecevable and cites earlier judgment 3958: "the process of decision-making involves a series of steps or findings which lead to a final decision. Those steps or findings do not constitute a decision, much less a final decision. They may be attacked as part of a challenge to the final decision but they themselves, cannot be the subject of a complaint to the Tribunal."
Märpel wonders what "final decision" is possible in the present case. The only disciplinary court for boards members is the Enlarged Board of Appeal and it already rendered an opinion and another is not planned. The Administrative Council was content in their December session that the matter had been settled. These judgments from January set the road free for AT-ILO to summarily dismiss whatever complaints may have been additionally filed, yet there is no indication that a decision on the substance of the case will ever be taken.
Interesting update on the #UPC by Margot Fröhlinger (EPO) who is confident that the German constitutional complaint will be rejected as inadmissible - #EPLIT Annual Meeting 2018 pic.twitter.com/YVUfsriiLA
"The EPO no longer offers truth. It offers no justice, either."So even people whose entire Twitter handle is dedicated to UPC boosting aren't buying it. Margot Fröhlinger has a long history of lying for the EPO's management, which is why she's known as the right-hand liar of Battistelli, the Liar in Chief. As we put it more than a year ago in relation to her specifically, "Lying Has Become the Norm When It Comes to the Unitary Patent (UPC)" (this is still true more than a year later!)
We would not at all be surprised if Battistelli just attempted to bribe/blackmail the judges somehow. Seeing what we have seen over the past few years, the EPO is so corrupt that it would stop at nothing (even 'softly' bribing media, academia and so on). ⬆