Bonum Certa Men Certa

The EPO's War on Justice and Assault on the Law -- Part 16: The Mystery of the “Missing Signatures”

Previously in this series:



The missing BoA signatures
Two signatures are missing from the EBA letter of 8 December 2014 protesting against Benoît Battistelli's unprecedented attack on the independence of the Boards.



Summary: The independence of the Boards of Appeal has long been compromised (and António Campinos recently exploited that to green-light European software patents), as judges pointed out repeatedly, so we look back at who protested this and who did not

As we mentioned in the last part, there are 35 signatures at the end of the letter of 8 December 2014 from the Enlarged Board of Appeal to the Administrative Council.



The casual observer could easily come away with the impression that the letter was unanimously approved and signed by all members of the Enlarged Board.

"The casual observer could easily come away with the impression that the letter was unanimously approved and signed by all members of the Enlarged Board."After all, what self-respecting member of a judicial body wouldn't want to endorse such a call for the preservation of its independence? Surely this would be a clear and unambiguous matter of professional pride.

However, by comparing the signatures on the letter of 8 December 2014 with the business distribution scheme [PDF] of the Enlarged Board for 2014, it can be deduced that there were two persons who did not sign, namely:

● the Chairman of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (Wim van der Eijk) and

● the Chair of Technical Board 3.5.05 (Andrea Ritzka).

This curious omission attracted the attention of IP Kat back in December 2014:

There are already worrying signs that even the members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal do not consider themselves independent. Two signatures on the now-famous letter of the EBA to the AC protesting the suspension of the Board of Appeal member were notably missing.

These are the signatures of Chairman of the EBA himself, and the member of the Enlarged Board still working (the other two have retired) who participated in Decision R19/12. The President of the EPO is reported to have been furious at that decision, which found that an objection to the participation of the Chairman of the EBA on the basis of suspicion of partiality, because of his dual role as vice president of DG3 (the Boards of Appeal), was justified.

Can it be that pressure has been applied to these two persons?


To this day it remains unclear why van der Eijk and Ritzka declined to sign the letter of 8 December 2014.

"To this day it remains unclear why van der Eijk and Ritzka declined to sign the letter of 8 December 2014."It would appear that either they were overwhelmed by fear of retaliation by Battistelli or else motivated by indifference or antipathy towards the efforts of their colleagues.

In either case, their failure to sign the letter reflects poorly on them.

If they withheld their signatures out of fear of the consequences of supporting the action of the vast majority of their colleagues, then this would have been tantamount to an implicit admission that their personal independence, and that of the Boards as a whole, was fatally compromised.

If, on the other hand, it turned out to be the case that they declined to sign out of indifference or even antipathy towards the efforts of their colleagues to safeguard the independence of the judicial body to which they belonged, then the implications would be even more damning.

In that case, their failure to sign would be indicative of a striking absence of professional solidarity and a disturbing lack of concern for the independence of the judicial body that they purport to represent.

In the case of van der Eijk his failure to sign the letter of 8 December 2014 has been raised on a number of occasions in subsequent proceedings before the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

For example, the matter was raised in the context of partiality objections submitted in review cases R 2/2014 [PDF] (interlocutory decision of 17 February 2015) and R 08/13 [PDF] (interlocutory decision of 17 February 2015).

In R 2/2014 the petitioner made the following submissions:

The President had issued a "house ban" on a member of the boards of appeal without prior involvement of the Administrative Council and the Enlarged Board of Appeal in accordance with Articles 11(4) and 23(1) EPC.

Whereas almost all internal members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal wrote a letter of protest to the Administrative Council (attachment to the petitioner's letter of 23 December 2014), the Chairman neither signed said letter nor remonstrated against the President's action, which the petitioner considered to be ultra vires. The Chairman's failure to act gave cause for a suspicion of partiality.

Furthermore, his partiality affected the other Members as well. Since the other Members could not expect the Chairman to defend their rights vis-à-vis the President, a party to proceedings could only doubt their impartiality.


In that case the Enlarged Board avoided dealing with the issues raised by the petitioner by dismissing the objection as "late-filed".

The issue surfaced again in case no. R 08/13 of 20 March 2015 where the petitioner made the following submissions:

The petitioners submitted that the fact that the chairman objected to [van der Eijk] had not been amongst those expressing their concerns about the President's disciplinary action against a member of the boards of appeal reinforced the validity of the statement in R 19/12 that the chairman's position as VP3 was in conflict with his role as an independent judge; the petitioners found it unacceptable that their case might be decided by a judge who, having maintained his position as VP3 after R 19/12 was issued, conveyed an impression to the public that he was not willing to show the necessary distance from a President who obviously did not respect the independence of the judiciary.


Once again, the Enlarged Board weaselled out of confronting the "elephant in the room".

It claimed that "to consider the general issue of the independence of its members, in particular the chairman of the Enlarged Board" would "go beyond its powers in the present case".

"Once again, the Enlarged Board weaselled out of confronting the "elephant in the room"."Referring to the letter of 8 December 2014, the Enlarged Board simply brushed aside the objection about van der Eijk's failure to endorse it stating that "no conclusions about the objective partiality of the Enlarged Board's chairman can be drawn from the fact that he did not sign it".

Ritzka's failure to sign the letter of 8 December 2014 was the subject of comment in an article by patent attorney Ingve Björn Stjerna published in January 2015 [PDF] and entitled "Unitary patent and court system - Advocate General’s Statements of Position: Superseded by reality":

Suspension of a Boards of Appeal member by the EPO President

[…] Little attention has so far been given to a further interesting aspect of the suspension incident. According to a report by “JUVE Rechtsmarkt” of 9 December 2014 …, the suspended person is supposed to be a member of Board of Appeal 3.5.05.

If this should be correct, it would push the significance of the incident even further, since the Chair of this Board is one of the three judges who handed down the mentioned interlocutory decision R 19/12, in which an insufficient separation of the executive and judiciary at the EPO was conceded.

According to reports, President Battistelli does not fully agree with the result of that decision. Since its publication, two of the three judges involved have retired.

Should Board of Appeals 3.5.05 really be affected by the suspension – an indication for which could also be the fact that its Chairman has not signed the mentioned letter from members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal –, this could also be interpreted as an attempt to set an example with regard to the last judge from the context R 19/12 remaining at the EPO and to emphasize that anybody being prepared to render courageous decisions like R 19/12 will have to pay a high price for this – which, of course, would be further evidence for a lack of independence of the Boards of Appeal. However, as long as no further details are known, this remains speculation.


Following her failure to sign the letter of 8 December 2014, it is rumoured that Ritzka received a lot of flak from other members of the Enlarged Board.

"We conclude by noting that although the "missing signatures" affair relates to events which happened back in December 2014, it nevertheless has contemporary relevance for G 1/21."According to well-informed internal sources, in the immediate aftermath of the affair she was "perusaded" to step down from participating in the Presidium [PDF] of the Boards of Appeal. The Presidium is the internal body responsible for laying down the rules and organising the work of the Boards of Appeal. However, it seems that, after a suitable period of "sackcloth and ashes", she has in the meantime returned to a position in that body.

We conclude by noting that although the "missing signatures" affair relates to events which happened back in December 2014, it nevertheless has contemporary relevance for G 1/21.

This is because the affair shows that two members of the entrusted panel - including the rapporteur - are persons whose commitment to the principle of judicial independence is in grave doubt.

The failure of these members to endorse the efforts of the vast majority of their colleagues back in December 2014 suggests that their commitment to the independence of the EPO's judicial organ is at best lukewarm and it would appear to raise serious questions about their professional integrity and impartiality.

Recent Techrights' Posts

The 'Other' Bruce... on Openwashing at OSI (and Not Bruce Perens, the OSI's Co-founder)
Openwashing people (connected to Microsoft) already do "open weights"
Gemini Links 10/11/2024: A Writer's Block, VIM Tips and Tricks
Links for the day
"Paperless Office" (Incompatible With the Law) as a Threat to Workers' Health at the EPO, Europe's Second-Largest Institution and Largest Patent Office
"Software Ergonomics need to be brought back to the agenda at a high level!"
Joel Espy Klecker, unpaid, terminally ill youth labor & Debian knew it
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
 
Links 10/11/2024: Meaning of Life and iPhone ‘Inactivity Reboot’
Links for the day
Links 10/11/2024: Microsoft Adds Surveillance to Notepad and Paint, TikTok Shutdown Order
Links for the day
Gemini Links 10/11/2024: Scrawlspace and California
Links for the day
Links 10/11/2024: Politics, Economics, and Ticketmaster Issues
Links for the day
Linux Foundation: We've Shut Down the Mailing Lists and Fired Everyone at Linux.com So We Can Spend Money Buying Puff Pieces and Paying Clickfraud/Spammers
deeply rogue
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, November 09, 2024
IRC logs for Saturday, November 09, 2024
[Meme] Linux Foundation Cuts
money is spent by the million on highly dubious things
Politics Becoming Way Too 'Toxic'
'Toxic' political discourse ought to be covered, but reducing the toxicity of coverage itself (e.g. inaccurately covering things to incite "the left" and "the right") is still challenging
Linux Foundation is Rebuilding the Berlin Wall (to Keep Russians Out of Linux)
So the Linux Foundation is basically acting a bit like oppressive Soviets
Linux Foundation is a Scam Like 'Crypto' (So is the Company of Jim Zemlin's Wife, Bakkt)
To us, the Linux Foundation is just a massive scam
Remembering and Respecting Fallen Ones by Avoiding or Stopping Wars (and Boycotting Companies That Want Wars)
The people who die tend to be the least privileged and connected
EPO is Blasting Its Own Foot (There Will be No EPO Left)
If the EPO carries on shooting its own foot, there will be nothing left of it
There's Always a Way to Improve
Self-improvement is a perpetual task
List of Debian lies and deception
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 09/11/2024: More Mass Layoffs and Concerns About Musk Working Like Trump Aide
Links for the day
Gemini Links 09/11/2024: Operating the Temple System and SeaweedFS
Links for the day
[Teaser] [Meme] Central Occupational Health, Safety and Ergonomics Committee (COHSEC) at European Patent Office (EPO)
These are not teenage gamers
Links 09/11/2024: Further Restrictions on Social Control Media, CASIO Cracked Again
Links for the day
Why Brown CIT Oughtn't Be Named After Thomas J. Watson (Like Many Faculties Ought Not be Named After Bill Gates)
In their own words
Reminder That Mass Layoffs Are Going on All Month This Month at IBM
The "silent" layoffs continue until the end of this month if not longer
[Meme] Just Blame Whoever Takes Advantage of Your Back Doors
The media will even sympathise with malicious and/or incompetent companies if they blame "Russia"
This Remembrance Sunday We Must Also Remember That Some 'Security Companies' Want More Cyberwar
Some companies profit from the cyberwar; hence, their objective is not to end the war
Non-Tech Enshittification: Post Office Perils and the Czech is in the Mail
We still hope that the parcel will be recovered (maybe at customs) or will be sent back some day
[Meme] Don't Try This at Home (But a Datacentre Might be OK)
Quit outsourcing to Social Control Media
There's No Free Lunch in Video Hosting
they say there's no free lunch; if you aren't paying for hosting and serving of "your" videos, you're not the customer and those videos, once uploaded, aren't quite yours anymore
Parroting Microsoft Talking Points About Computer Security
This past summer Richard M. Stallman (RMS) openly complained in a public event that the term "security" had come to mean all sorts of ridiculous things, including the very oppose of real security
Visits to OpenAI's Site Plunged by More Than 67% in the Past Half a Year Alone
'autocorrect on steroids' is mostly worthless
Pocock Running for Office Again
Pocock dealt with all sorts of 'politics' in Free software and, unlike many politicians, he has a background in science and technology
[Meme] Turning the EPO Into a Speculation Bank, Monetising It by Breaking the Law, Playing Real Estate (and Mortgage) Financial Games
travesty
Real Estate and Workplace Problems at the European Patent Office, Which Grants Fake Patents Under the Guise of "Law"
Report on the 54th meeting of the Munich LOHSEC of 20 June 2024
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, November 08, 2024
IRC logs for Friday, November 08, 2024
Links 09/11/2024: Politics, Climate, and Why Physical Cash is Crucial
Links for the day
Gemini Links 09/11/2024: Minerals, Rants, and Maintaining Planetary Balance
Links for the day
Plagiarism by Bots: Guardian Digital, Inc (linuxsecurity.com) Still Creates Fake Articles About "Linux"
100% fake
[Teaser] [Meme] New Ways to Impoverish Patent Examiners (Entrusted to Block Unjust Monopolies or Monopoly Applications)
Coming tomorrow!
Apple Tax funds: railways, defective concrete blocks in Ireland's North and West
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Daniel Pocock, Nomination for Ireland, Dublin Bay South, General Election 2024
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 08/11/2024: TikTok Bans and Clownflare Issues/Perils
Links for the day
Gemini Links 08/11/2024: RPS, O.D.I.N., and RSS in Yahoo News
Links for the day
Donald Trump as Censor in Chief Can Now Leverage Censorship Companies and Fake Protection Disguised as 'Security'
Centralised CAs were trouble all along
Technology: rights or responsibilities? - Part VI
By Dr. Andy Farnell
A Death of a News Industry
A theme we explored thrice today
Deciphering Centralised CAs and Why Their Demise Should be a Goal
Encryption in transmission is good; but who controls the key exchange and certification/authentication/validation?
Links 08/11/2024: Strikes, Recessions, and Slowdowns
Links for the day
"Many Applications Labelled as "Cybersecurity" and Given a Veneer of Legitimacy Are Really "Weaponised" and Abusive Code"
New from Dr. Andy Farnell
[Teaster] [Meme] New Ways of Wrecking (NWoW)
The EPO
Gateway for News and Blogs
In the long run, this site and its sister site (less overlap between them now) should hopefully become a popular destination for people who look for information, not chaff
Going Even Faster
We hope the site will be faster soon
Psychopaths Who Reaffirm Our Work's Value
Psychopaths and sociopaths lack empathy, so they're willing to go very far and stoop as low as they deem necessary
[Meme] How Low Can You Go at the European Patent Office?
Not just in terms of patent quality
More Cuts/End to Benefits for EPO Workers (Europe's Working Conditions Incompatible With the European Patent Convention)
"The Office is now reviving it but plans to introduce new cuts on benefits"
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, November 07, 2024
IRC logs for Thursday, November 07, 2024
Security Advisory: Debian falls for social engineering hacks
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Gemini Links 08/11/2024: US Election, RetroChallenge 2024, and More
Links for the day