tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post771191983060391291..comments2024-03-19T05:22:15.632+00:00Comments on The IPKat: Gantry-gate: CIPA releases statement on FD4/P6 (Infringement and Validity)Verónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger137125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-70242539430614060582019-05-30T10:39:56.843+01:002019-05-30T10:39:56.843+01:00Absolutely horrified at the extortionate high exam...Absolutely horrified at the extortionate high exams fees PEB is charging this year especially given the difficulties of the paper this year. People say that university fees are expensive but at least you get lectures, materials and tutorials out of it. The PEB is charging alot and offering minimal in return. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-73389550327286851572019-05-14T10:21:53.646+01:002019-05-14T10:21:53.646+01:00That is one of the critical issues with the PEB ex...That is one of the critical issues with the PEB exams. It is working for only a few and not for the many in the profession. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-75086642534279881652019-05-10T09:16:07.867+01:002019-05-10T09:16:07.867+01:00PEB has always used this theory of somebody openin...PEB has always used this theory of somebody opening a patent firm right away after passing exams. I see a very simple solution for this. Make it a requirement that you must have 5+ years experience post qualification before being allowed to open a firm in your name. This is a much better system than exams that are not fit for purpose. The current system is far too dependent on exam results and negatively impact on people's careers, wages and job opportunities. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-74582907574156488412019-05-09T20:55:11.345+01:002019-05-09T20:55:11.345+01:00I find the PEB to be very inflexible in their appr...I find the PEB to be very inflexible in their approaches/ideas and the (unnecessarily) difficult level of the examination are not justified. The PEB keeps referring to the fact that exams must be extremely difficult because someone could open a patent attorney firm when they pass. In real life, this theory is so far-stretched and unreal. No-one will do this. Other professions such as accountants or lawyers, builders etc... now have many routes to qualification (which are all equally respected) and they are flexible in their approaches to fit all sort of candidates. On the other hand, I find that the PEB exams just alienate many in the profession and confidence in the system is very low. Some candidates have children to care for, some are slightly younger, some learn at different paces etc... One set of exams do not fit all, and these exams are no longer sufficient for alot of candidates. The PEB needs to be flexible in how they test the new generation. Foundations are great because of the variety on offer. Why can't it be the same for the advanced papers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-68827978644370158732019-05-02T18:38:18.001+01:002019-05-02T18:38:18.001+01:00Personally, I find the Chief Examiner's commen...Personally, I find the Chief Examiner's comments in the CIPA journal quite upsetting. I had to wait for a while before I posted this. Yes, some of the comments directed at some Examiners are out of order but there was no attempt from the Chief Examiner to explain the outcry of unfairness and the PEB exams being "not fit for purpose". There was barely any acknowledgement of the hard work and the disappointment many candidates feel after their results. <br /><br />Last year, I was the top billing trainee but because I didn't pass an exam I only got a small raise. My colleague did pass their exams and got a significant pay increase. I'm not complaining about the worthiness of pay raises but I'm saying that my wages are being directly affected by the examination system PEB created even though I was deemed competent enough to carry out the work and hit my billing targets. I am now considering whether to stay in this profession as I don't want to be held back because of a few exams. I hope that others in more senior position could sympathise with many trainees in this position a bit more. We have heard from the Chief Examiner views, which I respect and its entirely her opinion, but CIPA readers should also be able to read the experiences from a candidate's perspective too. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-37674491070827511662019-05-01T14:49:12.188+01:002019-05-01T14:49:12.188+01:00I won't be taking of the PEB exams this year u...I won't be taking of the PEB exams this year until issues have been resolved and I am confident I am getting value (yes I now need to pay for myself). I learnt more preparing for my EQE exams. I have prepared really well in the past for the UK exams (8 months), with no luck. I have no idea what to expect with these UK exams, and it seems no one knows. That can't be right!<br /><br />Experience in IP matters is only gained by actually doing the work i.e. meeting/interacting with clients, doing a real Infringement/validity assessment through your time in the profession. You can't gain these experiences through an examination paper. A re-think please - the system ain't working. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-33304171327694541772019-05-01T14:41:32.863+01:002019-05-01T14:41:32.863+01:00I do think the PEB board needs to rethink. The tra...I do think the PEB board needs to rethink. The training is poor across the profession as a whole and attitudes need to change. Candidates have a right to be very upset with the current examination system. Its not working for a lot of people. The value of the UK exams in my opinion is diminishing. We no longer do much UK work as someone pointed out earlier. The exams needs to move with the times just like inventors needing to move with the time. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-55441976380492230922019-04-29T15:58:04.205+01:002019-04-29T15:58:04.205+01:00The Chief Examiner's letter in the April issue...The Chief Examiner's letter in the April issue of the CIPA journal made me laugh. Can you imagine what would happen if an allegedly experienced surgeon lopped off the wrong leg by mistake and said "Oops! I'm only human!"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-26621374362548352652019-04-22T12:13:54.222+01:002019-04-22T12:13:54.222+01:00I would also like to see more improvements in the ...I would also like to see more improvements in the PEB exams especially FD4. I think its important for the PEB and CIPA to address the concerns of many e.g. amount of time given in exams, suitability of topics/subject matter in FD6 (and possibly FD1), syllabus, training and development in the profession. One area I find difficult with FD4 is that I do not know what the Examiners are looking for in an answer and what skills are being tested. Are we testing candidates the ability to speed write an answer? It is not clear what the objectives are for FD4 and the PEB could do with releasing excellent templates/guidelines/model statements & example answers on each section of FD6. What are they looking for in each section of FD4 and why. These are not vitriol comments but a way to provide candidates better understanding as to what they need to do in each section. <br /><br />I don't think any of these exist (certainly the EPO provide much better training materials) and therefore, I won't be taking it this year until some of the concerns about FD4 are addressed. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-46797691206429208462019-04-22T12:01:42.331+01:002019-04-22T12:01:42.331+01:00I believe part of the issue is that candidates do ...I believe part of the issue is that candidates do not have sufficient GB work. Even when qualified, the amount of UK work is minimal and quite limited. Therefore, I truly understand why the PEB exams may seem irrelevant and have little value to many. As a result, many industrial roles do not expect UK qualification requirements. I would urge private practice to relax their insistence on gaining UK qualification(s) as it does not allow their employees to progress. I personally don't think UK qualification should be a condition for gaining promotion in private practice firms and that UK exams should be optional given how little UK work the profession carries out as a whole. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-80475624070888295432019-04-16T11:56:26.567+01:002019-04-16T11:56:26.567+01:00I think part of the problem is the expectation the...I think part of the problem is the expectation the firms place on candidates. As many have mentioned, some firms do not appear to be supporting candidates beyond 1 re-take when everybody knows how tough the exams are. Perhaps CIPA/PEB can get involve to work with firms as well as candidates. <br /><br />Having said that, the PEB could do with looking into the exams papers themselves for example, is there sufficient time for candidates to finish. In P6, there are far too many topics to cover e.g. construction, infringement, novelty, inventive step, internal validity within the time given. In real life, you wouldn't do an inventive step analysis if you think your claim lacks novelty so the amount of materials candidates need to get through needs to be addressed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-74409177743106840792019-04-12T11:06:34.076+01:002019-04-12T11:06:34.076+01:00The drop out rate is high and I am not surprised i...The drop out rate is high and I am not surprised if the PEB exams are part of the reason why very talented individuals with significant skills and knowledge of the IP profession decides to leave. There comes a point where enough is enough I suppose and we are talking about highly skilled individuals who can walk into another rewarding profession quite easily. <br /><br />I agree with the comments above that we do not want to lose so many bright and talented individuals based on these exams. I'm not saying to make the exams easier but to make them more relevant, more doable within the time frame, fairer exams and to actually make sure a decent amount of candidates who work hard/prepared well actually pass. 30% of candidates passing is very unsatisfactory and I do not believe the whole 70% of candidates are deemed not fit to practice. This is in view of the fact that the pass mark has dropped to 47% this year. <br /><br />I do hope the PEB look at these many comments and actually acknowledge/take actions on these genuine concerns from candidates and current attorneys.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-57006805920332008562019-04-12T04:00:43.109+01:002019-04-12T04:00:43.109+01:00Why does the PEB FD4 exam have such a low pass rat...Why does the PEB FD4 exam have such a low pass rate consistently every year? I think there is an issue. I also think that making an exam so difficult that only 30-35% of candidates pass from a pool of very highly skilled and intelligent candidates is not necessarily a good thing for the profession. Many of these highly skilled candidates end up applying their skills and knowledge in other professions as they decide to leave this profession. Indeed, many would still be doing IP work just not in this profession. They are very capable of doing some of the IP work and can undercut an attorney's hourly rate by doing the same job under a different title e.g. I've seen clients drafting very competent claims for a fraction of the price of an attorney. Be careful that we are not unintentionally creating a massive pool of skills and knowledgeable candidates that are not directly working in IP as patent attorneys. It would not be good for the profession as it may affect wages & future development. So I think something needs to be done because the profession is losing a lot of talent and I would predict that a large reason why trainees leave the profession is because of the exams and a perceived lack of change in the exam system. Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-37611173748502118062019-04-11T22:01:43.361+01:002019-04-11T22:01:43.361+01:00I would like to add that IPKAT has done a super jo...I would like to add that IPKAT has done a super job in allowing candidates and fellow professional to comment and raise their concerns. This type of blog is important to allow candidates to share their experiences. I find it much better than the formal surveys CIPA/PEB sends out as they are (fixed) rigid set questions and does not allow candidates to share their opinions and experiences like this blog for example. I would not have known that many others share some of my thoughts and concerns on P2/FD1 and P6/FD4 examinations. <br /><br />I think its important to provide a platform to allow candidates to freely discuss and I hope IPKAT continues to release something like this every year. I think its good for the profession as it would hopefully help CIPA/PEB to consider changes or take actions more quickly if they want to.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-81522808409318538912019-04-01T23:27:09.931+01:002019-04-01T23:27:09.931+01:00One or two resits is enough solely as your chance ...One or two resits is enough solely as your chance of avoiding the minority of examiners who "don't pass many" drops with resits.<br /><br />If you think this is a reasonable way for a professional exam to operate, fine. I can't imagine many share that view. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-33036902040650417292019-04-01T23:20:12.437+01:002019-04-01T23:20:12.437+01:00The Middlesex study covered exactly this point! It...The Middlesex study covered exactly this point! It was found that how examiners mark is not consistent.<br /><br />I would argue that the inter examination variation is the main problem with FD4.<br /><br />A low pass rate is vexing but an exam where some/most examiners comfortably pass a script but a minority of examiners will fail the same script is simply not fit for purpose. Indeed, the examiners openly admit to having contrasting answer preferences to other examiners.<br /><br />You must have an exam where candidates know what is a good pass. Presently you do not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-90548158309347662832019-03-20T09:41:53.088+00:002019-03-20T09:41:53.088+00:00As a candidate looking to sit FD4 for the first ti...As a candidate looking to sit FD4 for the first time in 2019, I am genuinely worried about this paper and I know there are many issues with the paper. Do you think CIPA/PEB will resolve these issues before the 2019 paper. Or would it be better to give it a miss until CIPA and PEB have published their investigation or miss this until things have improved. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-73199558919151336072019-03-20T09:33:31.140+00:002019-03-20T09:33:31.140+00:00Thanks for sharing Ron. This is a very good exampl...Thanks for sharing Ron. This is a very good example as to why PEB exams are not fit for purpose. It doesn't reflect real-life experiences or practices that many attorneys face. As another example, I often do alot of patent strategy searching but none of this is actually tested. In my real life experience with infringement and validity, we rely heavily on interacting with the client to discuss ambiguous terms of the claim language. Infringement and validity assessment takes a few weeks of work and not in my view, in 5 hours. Often, we don't actually advise one way or the other but present both sides of the arguments. We help the client understand the risks and advise as far as possible but ultimately, it is their business and up to them. Its up to the courts to decide the case if it gets that far. This type of work can only come with exposure to real life work and gaining valuable experience. It would be better to have a continual coursework/assessment where candidates would be required to gain certain skills/exposure or gain experiences in certain fields before being admitted into the profession. <br /><br />I also don't think FD1 reflects the modern daily profession (only my opinion). In real life, you would never advise without checking the law book and even then some scenarios that comes up with FD1 feels very artificial. Client interaction is a two-way thing and also relies quite heavily on personal interactions, business & commercial understanding. You can only really get that from gaining work experience and these exams seem to be blocking candidates getting that vital experience they need to succeed in this profession. In case anyone is wondering - I pass both P2 and P6 (when it was 4 hours). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-3604453357889020002019-03-19T13:08:54.405+00:002019-03-19T13:08:54.405+00:00Possibly the P6 exam marking corresponds with the ...Possibly the P6 exam marking corresponds with the examiners' experience of real-life practice. The more real-life experience I had, the worse my P6 marks. My real-life cases generally involved far greater technical and legal complexity than P6 scenarios. By way of example, GB patent with 112 pages of letterpress description and 76 sheets of drawings, several german-language EP patents where, for one, the translation fled in legal proceedings was significantly different from that filed with the UKPO, and for another, the claims related to the invention of another family member as they had no support in the description. Despite my problems with P6, my employers were very happy with the standard of my work.Ronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-68395410895489640122019-03-19T11:04:03.990+00:002019-03-19T11:04:03.990+00:00An open question seems to be whether P6 tests rele...An open question seems to be whether P6 tests relevant skills. I suggest an easy way to settle this would be to ask a someone who we all agree is an expert to sit the exam under exam conditions. I would suggest Mr Justice Arnold. If a specialist patent Judge cannot score >90%, then the mark scheme is incorrect. I will personally buy him two beers for this service (and I won't even insist on Spoons).<br /><br />(I admit, I have suggested Justice Arnold in slightly bad faith. His latest judgement was 618 paragraphs, so he does not seem like a man who is willing to bash out a complete infringement and invalidity opinion in 5 hours. It would take me 5 hours to write out just one of his table of contents).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-49947190387849324422019-03-18T16:29:55.549+00:002019-03-18T16:29:55.549+00:00Again, the comments section are filled with people...Again, the comments section are filled with people who have passed and simply refuse to accept that there are issues with P6, instead deciding the judge that people want a "free pass".<br /><br />The profession is changing, and specialisms are important both for training and for actual practice. One only needs to look at the volume of specialised case law before the EPO to see how this plays a role in real life. Having practised for (and passed) this exam very recently, there is simply nothing about this exam that corresponds to real life practice. I will reiterate what I said in the previous thread, that the way that people are training for this exam is simply to pass the exam, and nothing to do with how someone would actually conduct an opinion on infringement and validity.<br /><br />We have seen the same comments from the PEB and CIPA over the last few years, and nothing has changed. It's just sad.Sunk Costs Fallacynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-82056656913242863762019-03-18T12:29:05.802+00:002019-03-18T12:29:05.802+00:00"Go ahead and explore industry roles then... ..."Go ahead and explore industry roles then... Just accept that you will not have the same earning potential as you could in private practice with CPA status" - I'm not sure where you got this from, but the annual salary surveys clearly show that up to partnership level industry pays significantly better than private practice. You also don't need any UK/EP qualifications to work in industry, so salary is much less reliant on exam passes. I know some experienced industry IP professionals who are earning more than most of the associates/FSPs I know in private practice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-7844610478274485372019-03-18T10:49:22.713+00:002019-03-18T10:49:22.713+00:00Seriously thinking that its NOT worth paying to do...Seriously thinking that its NOT worth paying to do this exam (especially when I now have to pay for my own). They have been charging alot over the last few years but I don't see them taking on much of candidates feedback, who are by the way are their paying clients. I understand most of the money is generated from exam fees. <br /><br />One suggestion is to actually give candidates enough time to finish the paper. No need to design a paper that cannot be completed in time. That's not much to ask for. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-43950862605960133182019-03-18T06:57:41.970+00:002019-03-18T06:57:41.970+00:00Haha! Top notch trolling there. Of the over 100 co...Haha! Top notch trolling there. Of the over 100 comments here, count how many are in support of P6. That is very telling. Anyone who thinks they've passed (especially on the first attempt) purely because they were well-prepared and intelligent need to reassess their critical thinking. Hmm... I see the problem. Oh yes, passing P6 is a surefire indicator of one's ability to carry out I&V analysis!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-59595930245373879852019-03-17T23:00:36.889+00:002019-03-17T23:00:36.889+00:00Four papers isn't even a lot.Four papers isn't even a lot. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com