The UK patent exams are now fast approaching. Candidates are awaiting the "essential information for candidates" which is due to be released 1 month before the exams. With the first exam taking place on 12th October, we should therefore expect the information to be released by the start of next week. Hopefully the information will answer some of the outstanding questions regarding the exams (including the basic question of how long each exam will be?).
To assist candidates in their preparation for the exams, the PEB has released some FD4/P6 (Infringement and validity) model answers for the 2013 ("Water butts") and 2018 ("Gantry-gate") papers. The model answers can be viewed on the PEB website here. The answers were written by an unpaid volunteer in their own time "who recognised that many candidates did not fully understand what a good FD4 answer should look like". Indeed, there are many schools of thought in the profession as to how FD4/P6 should be approached. FD4/P6 also seems to be the paper that has the worst reputation, to which the comments here on IPKat here and here are a testament.
The PEB have previously provided example candidate scripts, but admits that it may be difficult for candidates to pick up what a FD4/P6 answer should look like from a sample script that scored at most 70%. The model answers are therefore welcome and many thanks should go to the anonymous volunteer.
In other FD4/P6 related news, readers may have noticed a small survey in the comments of the previous IPKat UK patent exams update. This survey has been set up by a reader and aims to garner the opinions for those in the profession on FD4/P6 (as a complement to the Mercer Review). The survey takes just a couple of minutes and can be taken here. We hope to publish the results here on IPKat.
IPKat wishes everyone good luck with their revision!
To assist candidates in their preparation for the exams, the PEB has released some FD4/P6 (Infringement and validity) model answers for the 2013 ("Water butts") and 2018 ("Gantry-gate") papers. The model answers can be viewed on the PEB website here. The answers were written by an unpaid volunteer in their own time "who recognised that many candidates did not fully understand what a good FD4 answer should look like". Indeed, there are many schools of thought in the profession as to how FD4/P6 should be approached. FD4/P6 also seems to be the paper that has the worst reputation, to which the comments here on IPKat here and here are a testament.
 |
| P6, 2013 - Water Butts |
The PEB have previously provided example candidate scripts, but admits that it may be difficult for candidates to pick up what a FD4/P6 answer should look like from a sample script that scored at most 70%. The model answers are therefore welcome and many thanks should go to the anonymous volunteer.
In other FD4/P6 related news, readers may have noticed a small survey in the comments of the previous IPKat UK patent exams update. This survey has been set up by a reader and aims to garner the opinions for those in the profession on FD4/P6 (as a complement to the Mercer Review). The survey takes just a couple of minutes and can be taken here. We hope to publish the results here on IPKat.
IPKat wishes everyone good luck with their revision!
UK patent exams: FD4/P6 survey and model answers
Reviewed by Rose Hughes
on
Thursday, September 10, 2020
Rating:
Reviewed by Rose Hughes
on
Thursday, September 10, 2020
Rating:
Follow the IPKat on LinkedIn 
![[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUj9v-k3DYaSVMR4lsmKDLHVB5nIoINuvZNbH2TQCelrfaAE9qmGSAQs-plzQ7HnZ7Svk_gRdrIODp0Nat5vpWajduit3xkArNhK76AHhX770RIJ62thfCVI5fnvcXU-5zH4NkUSfPY9FjRMFiK7OKJ7m7YSo2FzhyPSoA8ZWCsxaOXb0bBCoPQA/s72-c/Picture%201.png)
![[Guest post] Benelux Office rules on opposition proceedings prepared by ChatGPT](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi29VY0rNNP1Hqyz8RgB47r4q7fhqQfYHxsEbX_RKmT4KU5Y_vg7vB6dsAW91CidjMfJ38klTvD4mMtZb3QmwFPAHaGF88BPttWSbfYvo7UUg7MpFRTNtEjThmG0QaX2qZFFHSnN71i3YQZSBFC0SL7PgkAlme-XH8cSNWRFbOAOuLr_LMOGcImLQ/s72-c/Screenshot%202024-12-04%20at%2020.45.58.png)
Posts
At a quick look, the model answers look logical and sensible. I hope that they are a great help to candidates. Interestingly, the approach is directly contradictory to that taught on some JDD courses (we all know who I am talking about), and every feature is construed carefully. Perhaps this reveals why some good candidates go wrong...
ReplyDeleteWhilst the model answers are appreciated, this is the first time that I've come across an exam where it's explicitly acknowledged that candidates will not be able to achieve 100% in the alloted time!
ReplyDeleteThe model answers are welcomed, although it is unclear why they are being issued so close to the exams - candidates have only 5 weekends left to utilize them and these were originally "hoped" to be issued for candidates for last years exams. The lateness appears to be excused by the use of an "unpaid volunteer"- it is unclear why a professional exam board, charging candidates great sums of money in exam fees, needs to operate in such a way.
ReplyDeleteOut of curiosity, did the unpaid volunteer sit the exam to time? If not, I think all those who took those papers should have their marks adjusted accordingly.
ReplyDeleteJust looking at their model answer 1 for 2018 it is around 6700 words long. The average writing speed is around 13 words per minute. So at the average writing speed you'd need around 8.5 hours to produce the model answer. Even at the maximum writing speed of 20 wpm you'd need 5.5 hours. Realistically you're writing for a maximum of 3.5-4 hours in the exam. This model answer just proves it's an unreasonable exam to me to be honest.
ReplyDeleteJust to clarify, to write this in 2 hours (which is likely around the typical amount of time people are writing in P6 when you take into account the reading time) you'd need to be writing 55wpm, which is approaching the neuro/biological limit of what would even be theoretically possible (source: quora).
DeleteMaybe the unpaid volunteer is an ai or something? PEB: please clarify.
The UK profession is highly regarded worldwide for its ability to write a high number of words per minute. This is the major contributor to why UK patent profession receives work.
DeleteI see no problem in encouraging this. In fact, we should be aiming for 55+ wpm, so that we can prove how elite the UK profession is. If you are not willing to push your body to the next level in this way, maybe you're just not cut out to be a patent attorney and should quit.
I am yet to receive confirmation from PEB about whether i can use my ai to generate an answer for FD4.
DeleteI think their current position is that, aslong as i pay them more money they don't care. I will have to be supervised by my ai at all times post qualification (how the tables have turned), but CIPA say aslong as they collect their membership fees for the ai as well, they dont care.
On a side note, i've tried training my ai using past papers but unfortunately its having trouble identifying any patterns. I've also tried training it on UKIPO opinions & court judgements but this model doesn't score any points in the markscheme, for some reason it is having trouble giving an opinion and completely reversing it to pick up marks in inventive step, anyone got any ideas?
Seems these days some trainees just want to be given it on a plate. The problem is they're entering it too early. Back in my day we'd be hitting 100+wpm before even considering entering P6.
DeleteFair play to the person who dedicated their time to making the answers, but you can pretty clearly see it is written knowing the mark scheme, look at the conversion rate, stuff that gets marks is talked about in detail, not many words wasted on low scoring points...
ReplyDeleteIts fair enough, because i guess the idea is to show what a perfect example of technique is, but i think its unfair to expect people to be able to reproduce that in an exam unless they know the mark scheme.
Also, i think it may be a bit dangerous because in one or two years i bet these example scripts will be held up as an example of how little you need to write to get the perfect answer
I really can't understand the PEB. Time and time again it really seems like their actions are calculated to do nothing but take the mickey. What the hell is the point of publishing as an example of a good answer, something which has clearly taken far longer than the allowed time for the exam by someone with the mark-scheme sat in front of them. How did they ever think that would be a useful resource from which candidates could learn. Either someone at the PEB is completely ignorant of the widespread criticism of the PEB generally, and the P6 exam in particular, or it really was intended to inflame. The point of the sample answer seems again to be support to old "all the candidates are idiots, look how easy it is" line. I honestly believe it's the latter.
DeleteIt is clear from these sample scripts that there is clearly no "right" or "wrong" answer in P6. Lots of different answers can pass.Trainees just need to remember that the marks available will be allocated based on the perfect answer...
ReplyDeleteSo it doesn't matter if inventive step is not a point of contention in your answer, the fact that it is important in the perfect answer is all that matters. This shouldn't confuse candidates though, all that is required is for you to come up with your answer, and then think, where do i think the examiners, after reading 10 answer scripts (i.e. after the exam), will choose, by committee, to allocate the marks.
Once you know this, you will know where you can pick up the required marks, because your inferior opinion on its own will not score enough marks in the right section.
Yes, there is no right or wrong answer... you just need to adapt your wrong answer so it discusses all the same issues as the right answer...
DeletePerhaps the exams are training us to be politicians rather than patent attorneys
Delete