We fully agree to many point which have already been made above and would like to add the following:
1. Venue of the EQE: Should candidates write all papers at home/ in the office monitored by AI and if no, what could be a suitable alternative?
Provided a suitable and reliable monitoring writing all papers at home should be allowable.
2. Modular setup of the EQE: Should the EQE be held multi-level modular, with tests distributed over 1 year, with the first modules starting after 1 year of training?
Our main concern is that multi-level modular questions do not reflect the complexity of the real life work of a patent attorney. In addition, multi-level modular questions seem not to be adequate given that many issues which a patent attorney has to assess are not „black and white“ and need a deeper and more sophisticated approach (e.g. inventive step).
3. Overall timeline: Should it be possible to take the final exams after 2 years of training and if no, what should the minimum be?
A certain experience in every day life situations which an attorney faces should be required before taking the exams. We believe that a minimum duration of three years before taking the EQE is adequate.
4. Multiple choice questions: Should the percentage of multiple choice questions be increased and a number of auto-correctable (correctable by AI) tests be introduced?
We raise the same concern as under point 2.
5. Duration of the final exam: Should the final exam paper be reduced to a maximum of 2 hours and if no what should be the duration of the final exam paper?
Again, we have major concerns that the complexity of the final exam if reduced to 2 hours duration cannot reflect the complexity an attorney faces in real life. Given that an attorney has to concentrate for a much longer period of time and react fast and focused about complex subject matter (e.g. in oral proceedings), we believe that reducing the duration to 2 hours seems inadequate.
6. Resitting policy: Should the number of resits be limited and if yes how many resits should be allowed?
Without resists many candidates take the EQE without being properly prepared which increases the overall workload of the candidates (having to prepare several times) as well as the work of the examiners. Introducing a maximum number of resists would therefore be suitable in our eyes.
RGTH
1. Venue of the EQE: Should candidates write all papers at home/ in the office monitored by AI and if no, what could be a suitable alternative?
Provided a suitable and reliable monitoring writing all papers at home should be allowable.
2. Modular setup of the EQE: Should the EQE be held multi-level modular, with tests distributed over 1 year, with the first modules starting after 1 year of training?
Our main concern is that multi-level modular questions do not reflect the complexity of the real life work of a patent attorney. In addition, multi-level modular questions seem not to be adequate given that many issues which a patent attorney has to assess are not „black and white“ and need a deeper and more sophisticated approach (e.g. inventive step).
3. Overall timeline: Should it be possible to take the final exams after 2 years of training and if no, what should the minimum be?
A certain experience in every day life situations which an attorney faces should be required before taking the exams. We believe that a minimum duration of three years before taking the EQE is adequate.
4. Multiple choice questions: Should the percentage of multiple choice questions be increased and a number of auto-correctable (correctable by AI) tests be introduced?
We raise the same concern as under point 2.
5. Duration of the final exam: Should the final exam paper be reduced to a maximum of 2 hours and if no what should be the duration of the final exam paper?
Again, we have major concerns that the complexity of the final exam if reduced to 2 hours duration cannot reflect the complexity an attorney faces in real life. Given that an attorney has to concentrate for a much longer period of time and react fast and focused about complex subject matter (e.g. in oral proceedings), we believe that reducing the duration to 2 hours seems inadequate.
6. Resitting policy: Should the number of resits be limited and if yes how many resits should be allowed?
Without resists many candidates take the EQE without being properly prepared which increases the overall workload of the candidates (having to prepare several times) as well as the work of the examiners. Introducing a maximum number of resists would therefore be suitable in our eyes.
RGTH