The Photo Ops Festival of the Funky President António Campinos and Revolt From the Patent Examiners Whom He Perpetually Oppresses

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 9:24 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum ae22085fbb10ba705b2660a2b3208158
EPO Site Survey
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: European Patents are being granted for no reason other than application and renewal fees, awarding European monopolies to companies that aren’t even European (only about a third are actually European); staff of the EPO is fed up as it regards or views all this as an extreme departure from the EPO’s mission (and it’s also outright illegal)

THE EPO‘s official Web site has been full of fluff, misdirection, and promotion of illegal things (which are nonetheless lobbied for by multinational oligarchy, hence no legal consequences for such promotion). Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos have basically trashed the site, turning it into a self-serving shrine that promotes shallow politics, not science. The latest publications there are discussed in the video above, but meanwhile there’s some news from EPO staff about “Bringing Teams Together”. To quote a publication dated yesterday:

20 March 2023
su23015cp – 0.2.1 – 0.2.4 – 4.4

Bringing Teams Together (BTT)

Dear colleagues,

Bringing Teams Together (BTT) is becoming a reality, despite the many questions and objections that have been formulated by your Staff Representation1.

From the echo’s received, it seems BTT will be implemented by the line managers in all possible interpretations and variations, according to the mood and inspiration of the day2.

We would like to get an idea of what is happening in the different teams: what, if any, policy or principle is used to allocate fixed workplaces to staff. Bear in mind that the administration has given the 3-day rule as a guiding principle for the allocation of fixed workplaces3.

We kindly invite all staff to participate in this short anonymous survey with some information on how BTT is being implemented in their team. We’re trying to find out how BTT is implemented across directorates, how you feel about it, and we also look forward to reading your comments on this BTT exercise.

At the same time, we can readily understand that some people may expect that BTT will have an impact on their level of performance – whilst their 2023 targets may well disregard any such effect. [redacted]

Your SUEPO Team
1 CSC Publication: BTT – A divisive exercise
2 Also our colleagues are drawing inspiration: Bringing our Family Together
3 CSC Publication: 3 days for a fixed workplace


The EPO’s attack on its own staff is a sign of its failure. Only failed institutions attack their own workforce and they won’t get away with it in the long run. This already results in vocal concerns from the EPO's biggest stakeholders. Compelling smart people to do irrational if not illegal things is a recipe for disaster.


The European Patent Office’s Central Staff Committee Explains the Situation at the EPO to the ‘Yes Men’ of António Campinos (Who is Stacking All the Panels)

Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:57 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 59217133f9f9582b2c0934acb9c644a5
EPO and the GCC Meeting
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The EPO’s management is lying to staff (even right to their faces!) and it is actively obstructing attempts to step back into compliance with the law; elected staff representatives have produced detailed documents that explain the nature of some of the problems they’re facing

THE document discussed above [PDF] is very long. It can help explain internal EPO affairs to outsiders — i.e. people to whom EPO blunders are known only through media channels (those that Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos have not intimidated into silence with threats of lawsuits and various sanctions).

The Central Staff Committee (CSC) does a good job explaing the “hoax” studies of the administration, pretending that the EPO is poor in order to lessen the compensation to staff and thus deter/discourage properly-trainied and experienced staff from joining/staying. Today’s EPO is gradually running out of talent; as EPO insiders have warned repeatedly, this will result in further collapses, including patent quality and validity issues (illegitimate patents being granted, including European software patents). The biggest stakeholders in the EPO have already complained about the quality of European Patents; they too stand to lose because many of these patents can be used against them; only patent litigation firms stand to benefit regardless of the merit of cases.

The “covering message” (like cover letter) for the above PDF stated what was discussed, albeit the cronies of the President didn’t bother discussing much. They just said “yes” to proposals. Here’s the outline:

Report on the GCC meeting of 28 February 2023

Dear colleagues,

The following five items were on the agenda of the GCC meeting of 28 February 2023, on which the CSC members of the GCC raised their concerns and tried to get further clarifications.

- Revision of Circular No. 364 – Implementation of the New Career System – Rewards related amendments – for consultation GCC/DOC 02/2023

- General Guidelines on Rewards 2023 (President’s Instructions on Rewards) – for consultation GCC/DOC 03/2023

- Amendments of the Service Regulations related to the Staff Committee Elections (CA/9/23) – for consultation GCC/DOC 04/2023

- GCC Rules of Procedure – for consultation GCC/DOC 05/2023

- Data Protection Framework for the Administrative Council and its subsidiary bodies – for information GCC/DOC 06/2023

The detailed and reasoned opinions by the CSC members of the GCC can be read in this paper.

The EPO is in a state of crisis because not only sceptics and critics are becoming more vocal. Even longtime allies of the Office are growing impatient. We reproduce a recent letter below.

EPO quality letter page 1

EPO quality letter page 2


Remuneration and Pensions at the EPO Reduced (Relative to Inflation), Guaranteeing a Decline in Quality of Work

Posted in Europe, Finance, Patents at 2:46 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

António Campinos with money

Summary: Purchasing power is rapidly decreased and the EPO — sitting on a pile of cash illegally obtained — refuses to catch up; staff is concerned that life will become a lot harder and, as noted earlier today, this means worse quality of work, not just worse quality of life

We’ve only just published the latest letter about the “Bringing Teams Together” initiative/scheme/scam. Staff of the EPO is under an attack fiercer than ever before (maybe representatives of staff were subjected to a lot more abuse by Benoît Battistelli, but that’s not all the staff).

António Campinos, who prides himself and brags about his socialist dad, is a crooked corporate shill that is antisocial and — to quote himself — is just “the f*cking president” (around a year ago he used the “f word” repeatedly, acting no better than Vladimir Putin because his relationship with Belarus had been exposed).

“Transparency helps because nothing scares vampires more than daylight.”This post shares some of the sentiments expressed by EPO insiders. Some days ago there was a call for action, focusing on salary and pension aspects in isolation. To quote:

Safeguard your rights against the adjustment of salaries and pensions in 2023

Dear SUEPO members,
Dear colleagues,

The new salary adjustment procedure has caused a noticeable adjustment of salaries and pensions in 2023. However, given the significant cuts and salary freezes in previous years, this should not be overstated. Staff and pensioners will remain at a disadvantage.

It is unclear how the adjustments for 2023 were calculated. It appears that the sustainability clause and the periodical settlement of the new procedure were not applied correctly – to the detriment of staff and pensioners. In particular, it is not comprehensible how the balances of the redistribution pool were used and why/how the Office could reach the conclusion that the pool would be implicitly exhausted.

Since the adoption of the new salary adjustment procedure in June 2020, SUEPO has supported its members with templates for litigation against it. The present requests for review are subsidiary to the templates of the past. While the Central Bureau of SUEPO does not confirm or accept the application of the new salary adjustment procedure, the Office should certainly not interpret the new method to the disadvantage of its staff and pensioners.

The above was circulated by the union, but not only union members are concerned. The elected representatives speak about the very same issues. The Central Staff Committee (CSC), for instance, circulated the following message today:

Family Budget Survey 2023: Survey impacting on our salary adjustment

Dear colleagues,

On 6 March 2023, you (in the Hague and Munich) should have received an e-mail invitation to participate in the Family Budget Survey 2023.

The survey is a regular exercise conducted jointly by the International Service for Remuneration and Pensions (ISRP) at the OECD and the EU’s Statistical Office (Eurostat).

It will be open for submissions for four weeks to give you time to collect the data and complete the survey over a few days if necessary.

It will provide data to update the expenditure pattern for international staff in The Hague and Munich, which is an essential element in the calculation of the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) used in the salary adjustment procedure. PPPs are used to ensure that staff in the different locations receive equivalent pay.

Therefore, we strongly encourage colleagues from The Hague and Munich to participate in the survey and to provide accurate answers.

They will certainly share the results some time after the deadline is reached. We’ll try to gather information related to the findings. Transparency helps because nothing scares vampires more than daylight.

The EPO Treats Its Own Staff Like Trash and Quality/Legitimacy of the EPO’s Work is, Expectedly, Reduced to Trash

Posted in Deception, Europe, Patents at 2:20 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 573d697aa3946018dd94eb0b44d98c01
Cannot Even Get a Seat and Desk at EPO
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The Central Staff Committee at Europe’s second-largest institution (which grants European monopolies to corporations from all around the world) is very upset about a collective assault on the staff, which is already besieged and overworked, urged to grant as many monopolies as possible as quickly as possible, thus defeating the purpose of patent examination (if insufficient time is allocated, the patent application is assumed novel and presumed valid, hence granted)

THE VIDEO above goes through this new letter from the Central Staff Committee (CSC) of the EPO, dealing with the notorious “Bringing Teams Together” initiative, which will have many casualties and already had some (including very high-profile ones).

The CSC’s letter speaks for itself and the video above speaks of related facts, background, and context. Is the EPO ‘certifying’ monopolies that are unjust if not outright illegal in order to fake 'production'? This whole situation is a stain on Europe’s reputation. We intend to keep it our top priority for coverage even though we now have other stuff to cover or do, e.g. 1) 2 site migrations; 2) coding; 3) Sirius series and 4) GitHub exclusives. GitHub is already collapsing; not just financially, there are also layoffs, as last noted earlier today. At one point we’ll get around to finishing our long series (ongoing since 2021) about GitHub.

We don’t worry about lacking material, we only lack time. The EPO-friendly ‘media’ has been covering some EPO scandals lately — a trend which gives us more hope and motivation. We’re not unearthing stuff as much as sharing what already circulates among staff.

Here’s the full open letter dated 5 days ago:

European Patent Office | 80298 MUNICH | GERMANY

Ms Nellie Simon
Vice-President Corporate Services

By email



Reference: sc22031cl
Date: 09/03/2023

“Bringing Teams Together”:

Three days per week for a fixed workplace

Dear Ms Simon,
The project “Bringing Teams Together” remains a major cause of concern and unrest among staff. We made concrete proposals in the Working Group meeting of 18 January 2023 (see our report here) and were expecting further meetings to take place. Until now, we have not received an invitation.

In your letter of 3 February 2023 you confirmed the statement you made in front of the Administrative Council1 and reaffirmed that “as a guiding principle it makes complete sense that staff members who work at least three days per week at the office or have special needs determined on a case-by-case basis will be allocated a fixed workplace, while staff choosing to come less often will use workplaces for the day.”

However, at line management level, your statement is neither guiding nor a principle.

Some line managers have decided not to allocate any fixed workplace. Some line managers have such a limited number of offices available that only staff coming 4 or 5 days a week could be allocated a fixed workplace. Sick employees are trying to seek support from Health & Safety, but the department replies that it cannot be involved in room allocation.

1 CA/96/22, par. 76, “VP4 said that the Office did not encourage or discourage staff to come to the premises. Staff could choose what was best for their well-being. Only staff that came one or two days per week had to book an office for the day, the others were allowed a permanent office”

We believe that the project and its chaotic implementation will not improve the atmosphere in the Office or the trust in the upper management.

We urge the Office to be consistent with its own statements, to fulfil its duty of care and to convene a Working Group meeting in due course.

Yours sincerely,

Alain Dumont
Chairman of the Central Staff Committee

Cc: Mr Florian Grundies, Principal Director General Administration

Is Grundies the latest person willing to attack human beings on behalf of special interests, relying on cognitive dissonance to justify abusive actions in pursuit of money and power?

The CSC has shared this with staff this week. “Dear colleagues,” said the representatives. “The project “Bringing Teams Together” remains a major cause of concern and unrest among staff. Vice-President Corporate Services announced that “as a guiding principle it makes complete sense that staff members who work at least three days per week at the office or have special needs determined on a case-by-case basis will be allocated a fixed workplace, while staff choosing to come less often will use workplaces for the day.” However, at line management level, the announcement is neither guiding nor a principle. In this letter, we urge the Office to be consistent with its own statements, to fulfil its duty of care and to convene a Working Group meeting in due course.”

The only explanation that we find plausible here is that EPO management is trying to crush the staff and bust the union, as noted in the video. This is possibly illegal where the EPO does this, but the managers claim to have diplomatic immunity, so they assume they can get away with it no matter what. And at what or whose expense?

The Central Staff Committee’s letter to Madame Simon shows contradictions or, put another way, lies. Lying is how a person can get promoted at the EPO when nepotism is lacking. Diversity at the EPO alludes to bedroom politics.


EPO Weaponises International Women’s Day to Cover Up Its Attacks on Women

Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:39 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 16272ba8c3034e82e1d6d5269085e6e5
EPO Women Affairs
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The narcissistic management of the EPO pats itself on the back over “feminism”, “diversity” etc. while women who actually work — real work — at the Office (examiners, not the family/cabal lodged at the top floor) dispute this misleading PR-esque narrative

Some years ago there was some waffle [PDF] from Elodie Bergot, who was promoted not as a woman but as a family member (spouse) of the EPO‘s “mafia” (Benoît Battistelli‘s faithful servant from INPI). Bergot seems to be attacking more women than she attacks men (M. & E.). How’s that for an achievement? Cat fights are not breeding diversity — more so in an office that already fails to attract women and barely offers them promotions (compared to men), according to the EPO’s own numbers.

International women’s dayAntónio Campinos also “supports” women. He brought women without relevant experience in patents just because they had previously worked with him at EUIPO — the subject of a new scandal as noted in the video above. It is connected to Christian Archambeau, a confidant of Campinos, who originally came from the EPO.

Nothing allures women scientists more — and even attracts them to the EPO — than a Mr. Campinos dropping “F bombs” in front of women. Apply today, the “fucking president” (his description of himself) loves women applicants.

Staff Committee The Hague
Comité du personnel de La Haye
Personalausschuss Den Haag

8 March 2023


An invitation to work together towards gender equity at the EPO

Dear colleagues,

International women’s day is celebrated on March 8th: “a day to Celebrate women’s achievements, raise awareness about discrimination and take action to drive gender parity”.

#EmbraceEquity is this year’s campaign theme of the International Women’s Day. Equity aims to ensure the access, equality of opportunity and advancement for everyone, through the identification and removal of obstacles which, in the present context, prevent women from fully participating in all aspects of life.

In 2018 (reflecting the data up to 2017), the administration prepared a document “Gender Awareness Report – 2018” containing several indicators which revealed weak points in D&I policies at the Office.

Since then, the administration has put some measures in place. The staff representation believes that it is the right moment to evaluate the impact of each of the measures taken, and to receive an overview of the present situation as well as an evaluation of the previous policies. Therefore, we requested an update of the “Gender Awareness report” complemented with an in-depth study on “Equality in career”, with a specific focus on the impact of the NCS on female colleagues.

To shed more light on areas where the Office is doing well regarding gender equality, and where further improvements can be made, in 2018 staff representation requested that available data concerning the equality of careers by gender and by site of employment be made available. One deliverable of the D&I team is to “establish historical and current data sets on key D&I criteria to track progress and inform policy”, and we kindly request that the information be shared. In 2022 the central staff committee analysed some of the annually published statistics on the reward system, and described that although some steps in the right direction had been taken, the new career system still has the effect of widening the gender pay gap.
Furthermore, the negative effects of the education allowance and childcare reform on women should not be underestimated, and there are question marks as to the effects on women of the Bringing Team Together project.

According to the EPO intranet Diversity & Inclusion intranet page: “D&I is naturally embedded in our Office’s Mission, Vision and Values. In 2022 we will move to identifying and implementing concrete actions on D&I – that make a real difference to

our staff and that integrate D&I in our daily activities – as a core ingredient of the design and execution of the Office’s strategy. This approach will allow us to identify areas we need to improve, target solutions, assess outcomes and report openly on our progress.”

We welcome the administration to share the concrete actions and progress report, and once again express our willingness to work together towards embracing gender equity at the EPO leaving no one behind.

“We cannot all succeed when half of us are held back”
Malala Yousafzai

Kind regards,
Local Staff Committee The Hague (LSCTH)

The EPO is trying to dominate presence for this topic, hitting all sorts of keywords to distract from the actual stories of actual EPO employees who do the work and feel oppressed. We don’t suppose any blog or media site will tell the story of women inside the EPO; instead there will be sponsored puff pieces for the phony narratives pushed out by the EPO’s PR department, managed by a friend of Campinos (nepotism).


The Only ‘Green’ EPO Management Understands is Money

Posted in Europe, Patents at 11:35 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Green as in dollars?

Question mark

Summary: The elected representatives of staff in Europe’s biggest patent office explain why the management’s greenwashing stunts are just posturing

THE Local Staff Committee The Hague (LSCTH), or the elected representatives of EPO staff stationed in the Rijswijk area, have sent a letter to António Campinos et al because the Frenchman Campinos — like his friend, predecessor and compatriot Benoît Battistelli — resorts to a lot of shallow greenwashing. The EPO’s Web site habitually resorts to political pandering, pinkwashing, and greenwashing. Maybe that impresses some gullible politicians (who themselves whitewash their name using such tactics), but scientists who work for the EPO don’t fall for the crude propaganda.

“Maybe that impresses some gullible politicians (who themselves whitewash their name using such tactics), but scientists who work for the EPO don’t fall for the crude propaganda.”Citing a letter that we shared here last year, they explain that the EPO is basically faking environmentalism while snubbing those who are impacted and those who know better than Campinos et al. Campinos is just a foul-mouthed politician with a law degree. He’s piggybacking his father’s career and his father’s reputation; he also piggybacks corrupt Frenchmen like Team Battistelli (or the Portuguese government when this alternative or alter ego of his suits his political ambitions better). Going back in time, we can clearly see how Campinos had rigged elections and essentially bought himself a place at EUIPO, later to be parachuted into the EPO, acting as a successor for his original enablers. Profound corruption at the EPO would, under normal circumstances, attract some attention from the German government. “How much longer before the nations cannot avoid addressing the EPO?” an associate asked today. “It is complicated by Germany’s conflict of interest in regards to income. It’s often ignored and more often not even recognised.”

The letter below focuses on the situation in the Dutch territory; that in its own right is a massive bribery scandal and passive corruption at the highest level, as future leaks will reveal. LSCTH explains to colleagues:

Following the open letter “Consistency in sustainability” from the chair of the Local Staff Committee Munich, the Local Staff Committee the Hague also enquired about the following topics:

- The replacement of the pond in front of the new main building by solar panels;

- The replacement of the meeting rooms in the new main by IT servers;

- The introduction of free e-charging stations and the provision of a comprehensive mobility concept which would incentivize commuting means with reduced emissions.

Here’s the full letter:

European Patent Office | 2288EE RIJSWIJK | NETHERLANDS
To: Mr António Campinos
President of the EPO

Cc: Ms Nellie Simon (VP4), Ms Roberta Romano-Götsch (CSO)

European Patent Office
Patentlaan 2
2288 EE Rijswijk

Staff Committee The Hague


Date: 23-02-2023

Open letter: Consistency in sustainability in the polder

Dear Mr President,

Following the open letter “Consistency in sustainability” from the chair of the Local Staff Committee Munich, we would like to enquire about the following related topics:

- The pond in front of the new Main building is being replaced by solar panels1: from our understanding of the original design, one of the environmental
benefits of the pond2 was to provide the possibility of free seasonal natural cooling and heat rejection; specifically, to help cool the building’s IT infrastructure. It also seems that a substantial area covered by solar panels will in fact not regularly be exposed to sunlight. We are wondering:

o Whether the architect was consulted before these changes were decided upon, and if so, what was his reply?
o Will there be any environmentally friendly seasonal free cooling/heat rejection for the building’s IT infrastructure after the solar panels are installed?
o Have any risk studies looking into the installation of solar panels around the base of the Main building been undertaken? (fire risk, rain water run off, wind damage etc)
o Can the above as well as the business case and environmental balance of these infrastructural alterations be disclosed on the EPO intranet and internet as part of the environmental policy?

1 New design features for The Hague site, EPO, 8.12.2022
2 The pond regularly leaked into the entrance and bicycle sheds, and we are wondering why the building company was not requested to fix this issue?

- The meeting rooms on the first floor of the New main, built around 2017, include(d) state of the art video conferencing systems, which are essential especially now that the “New Ways of Working” have been adopted. From our understanding at least some of these rooms will be replaced by IT servers. Here as well, we kindly request that staff be informed of:

o What alternatives (i.e. meeting rooms for 30+ participants including state of the art video conferencing systems) will be available after the renovations have taken place?
o Why is the existing IT server room not suitable?
o What are the business case and environmental balance of these infrastructural alterations?
o Can the above be disclosed on the EPO intranet and internet as part of the environmental policy?

- As per the passage in letter by the Munich Staff committee chair relating to the introduction of extra free car e-charging stations:

o Again, what are the business case and environmental balance of this development, and can they be disclosed on the EPO intranet and internet as part of the environmental policy?
o According to the Environmental report 2021 (p.27), the EPO “will implement a comprehensive mobility concept to reduce emissions from [...] commuting”. Staff representation kindly requests to be involved in the development of such an all-round mobility plan which would incentivize walking, cycling and use of public transport with much lesser emissions3

Kind regards,
Jorge Raposo

Chairman Local Staff Committee The Hague
On behalf of the Committee

3 See p.40/59 of latest Environmental Report

Thankfully some of the media, despite being in the pockets of patent extremists (including Team UPC), has been devoting some space to EPO controversies. Not enough, but it’s a start.


The EPO Grants Illegal Patents. EPO Managers Hope That a Kangaroo Court Can Endorse Illegal Patents.

Posted in Europe, Patents at 10:14 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 569bff0a35f42185c1521efcb8827cd9
EPO Patent Quality Under Scrutiny
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: Evidence suggests that EPO managers have knowingly and intentionally ruined patent quality; they conspired against the charter of the EPO and then covered that up; stakeholders are complaining while EPO managers try to install “controlled judges” that would tolerate the EPO’s abusive behaviour — in effect implementing a coup for the litigation ‘industry’ with its largest clients (monopolistic multinationals)

IN the just-published "EPO Togetherness" post we showed that the EPO’s assault on its own staff is intensifying greatly. There’s no ambiguity about it; EPO management acts in a self-harming fashion assuming that the managers’ goal is the same as the goals of the Office (in reality, or in practice, there tends to be a conflict of interest; for fixed but not permanent terms the management can intentionally bury the institution for short-term gains). Were the managers appointed to serve science or to serve a bunch of lawyers, manning national patent offices and going back and forth (revolving door) between the private and public sector?

The EPO‘s presidents since 2010 (Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos) have destroyed patents’ quality in pursuit of illegal “goals”. European software patents (monopolies on mathematics) and patents on nature/life are manifestations of this.

“Were the managers appointed to serve science or to serve a bunch of lawyers, manning national patent offices and going back and forth (revolving door) between the private and public sector?”Seeing that national patent courts rarely tolerate fake European Patents, the EPO has pushed for an illegal system and basically incited (in its official site, EPO.org) to commit crimes. It has been colluding with lying lawyers, who for profit’s sake decided that they would openly and fragrantly attack constitutions, conventions, and laws. We hope that the EPO’s biggest union will talk about this problem a lot more often, but it’s not for us to decide…

Either way, shown and discussed in the video above is EPO.org, a propaganda site of Team UPC (sponsored by Team UPC), and some internal material from the EPO, including the latest publication from the Central Staff Committee (CSC). Everyone needs to see this, along with the evidence presented, as the CSC and the staff union (SUEPO) got vindicated repeatedly, including earlier this year. “Several European companies have recently expressed serious concern about the declining quality of granted patents by the EPO in a letter sent to Vice-President DG 1,” the CSC claims, citing the phony “Quality Reports” (warning: epo.org link; it’s like the fake “Ombuds”) and some other documents (like these letters from almost exactly 6 years ago [1, 2], attributed to VP Cosado and VP Willy (Guillaume) Minnoye). This lie started under Battistelli — a tradition that continues under the person who perpetuates and covers up the same abuses. When the management claims “Attack on quality delivered by EPO staff” the managers try to portray the people who actually protect the staff aw people who try to discredit the staff. “Staff Representation criticizes EPO quality during Administrative Council,” says the title as if this is a religious matter and an act of blasphemy was committed.

The text below alludes to this presentation from 2022 [PDF] and it contains a lot of other references that are publicly accessible.

Zentraler Personalausschuss
Central Staff Committee
Le Comité Central du Personnel


Patent Quality

Can it be put back on the EPO’s agenda?

Several European companies have recently expressed serious concern about the declining quality of granted patents by the EPO.

The future of the European patent system depends on how the EPO, as a public service, is able to set worldwide standards to foster innovation in the interest of European society. Consequently, management should take the criticism very seriously. The staff would be perfectly capable of carrying out prior art searches of the highest quality and, accordingly, conducting patent examination procedures that result either in patents that stand up in court or in refusals when adequate. Mismanagement resulting in decreasing quality should be put under the spotlight: recruitment policy, time budgets and incentive systems for staff, HR policies, IT strategy, etc.

The Staff Committee is ready to contribute actively and constructively to these points so as to respond to external criticism and put quality back on the EPO’s agenda.

Increasingly loud criticism

The members of Industry Patent Quality Charter (IPQC) recently sent a letter to Vice-President DG 1 signed by the Chief IP counsel of Siemens. IPQC members are important European players1 in the patent world and several of them have been among the largest patent applicants to the EPO in recent years.

This letter follows the critical reception of the “EPO Patent Quality Charter” (part of Mr Campinos’ so-called “Strategic Plan 2023″) that came into force on 1 October 2022. It is indeed an open secret that Mr Campinos’ “EPO Patent Quality Charter” was a disappointment. The Chief IP counsel of Siemens told JUVE Patent in October 2022 that “[a]ll the measures are too focused on the improvement of internal processes and their effectiveness, including speed and timeliness. This does not necessarily enhance the actual quality of the granted patents.”2

1 ATOS, Bayer, Deutsche Telekom, Drägerwerk AG & Co. KGaA, Ericsson, Eraeus, HP, Iveco Group N.V., MTU, Nokia, Physik Instrumente (PI) GmbH & Co. KG, Procter&Gamble, Qualcomm, Roche, Siemens AG, Siemens Healthineers, Syngenta, Vodafone, Volvo, …
2 “Dissatisfied industry users push back against EPO quality measures” by JUVE Patent (12.10.2022) https://www.juve-patent.com/news-and-stories/legal-commentary/dissatisfied-industry-users-push-back-

The recent IPQC letter follows up on an earlier meeting with EPO management and identifies many relevant topics with regard to the quality of search and examination at the EPO, which should obviously be discussed and fixed:

− Complete searches
− Complete examination
− User feedback
− Training (of examiners)
− A transparent incentive system for examiners

Each topic is subdivided into detailed points. The Kluwer Patent blog and Juve Patent have reported on the letter.

Well-known issues

Staff Representation has been critical of management’s approach to quality for many years and has denounced the deleterious effects on substantive quality of the “New Career System” (NCS) introduced in 2015 which incentivises examiners to focus on their work as first examiner and in this role to issue as many search reports and grant as many patents as possible, with substantive quality being secondary to productivity and timeliness3456. Management openly reproached7 the staff representation regarding its interventions on the EPO’s quality policies in front of delegations and user representatives in the Administrative Council.

EPO staff have repeatedly expressed their concern about the decreasing importance of quality in several staff surveys conducted by Technologia: for a great majority of respondents, the importance of quality in relation to quantitative targets has steadily decreased at the EPO since 20138.

The official figures from the Directorate Quality Audit (DQA), which assesses the substantive quality of the work in DG1, also show a negative trend: the compliance rate of grants has dropped from 85% in 20159 to 75% in 202210, an all-time low. The substantive quality of searches is steadily decreasing.

The Office is in denial

In the face of the converging signals of deteriorating quality, how can management continue to pretend that everything is fine. For example, VP 1′s response to recent criticisms of prioritising efficiency over quality has been to declare them “unfounded”11. In his New Year’s

3 “Measure for Measure: Quantity, Quality & Timeliness for Europe”, CSC paper of 14.09.2016 (sc16170cp)
4 “Measure for Measure: Quantity, Quality & Timeliness for Europe”, CSC paper of 14.09.2016 (sc16170cp)
5 “Good enough? A discussion paper about Patent Quality at the EPO”, LSC MU and BE paper of 19.04.2018 (su18003mp)
6 “All the President’s Peas”, CSC paper of 18.01.2018 (sc18008cp)
7 “Attack on quality delivered by EPO staff”, Clarification to publication (see also here) of VP1 and VP2 dated 17.03.2017, CSC paper of 20.03.2017 (sc17040cp)
8 Technologia Survey Results 2022 (page 31) of staff survey frequency tables: https://www.suepo.org/archive/A1-OEB_EN-2010-2013-2016-2020-2022.pdf
9 EPO Quality Report of 2016 or here
10 DQA Report of 2022 or here
11 “Efficiency-over-quality criticisms are unfounded, says EPO VP for Patent Granting Process”, IAM Magazine (12.12.2022) https://www.iam-media.com/article/efficiency-over-quality-criticisms-are-unfounded-says-epo-vp-patent-

greetings to staff, Mr Campinos referred to what he sees as general positive feedback from 6000 EPO users and said that “[q]uality is the appraisal of the many – and not the discontent of the few”. In other words, the President considers that complaints from the public or users about the quality of EPO patents − which undoubtedly include IPQC members − can be downplayed if not ignored.

The fact is that management’s interest in genuine patent quality began to fade a decade ago, when the pursuit of endless productivity and production growth replaced a sense for public service and common sense.

Which future for (substantive) quality?

Under the topics of “Complete Searches” and “Complete Examination”, the IPQC members stress the need to give examiners sufficient time (budget) to carry out their tasks. Examiners (and formalities officers) have the right qualifications and dedication to carry out their duties in accordance with the EPC and the Implementing Regulations, if sufficient time is given for a proper functioning of the divisions, including quality control within the divisions12.

The recruitment policies need to be reconsidered, especially the decision not to recruit formalities officers and to replace only 80% of leaving examiners, despite a steady rise in the workload and a predictable wave of retirements of highly experienced staff in the coming years13.

The long-term attractiveness of the Office as an employer and the impact of the recent recruitment policies14 needs be assessed.

The CSC has always advocated for a transparent incentive system for examiners (and other staff, particularly a career system with a performance-based reward system that provides the right incentives to get the job done right and a commitment that staff careers are a long-term investment, not a liability.

Senior management will not spontaneously call into question the mantra of ever-increasing productivity, especially in DG1, where “management by Excel sheet” now prevails. Hopefully the IPQC initiative will trigger an adequate reaction that goes beyond denial, window dressing and continuing to hope that progress in IT tools will solve the problems. In addition to an IT strategy that needs to be revised, internal appreciation of the EPO’s own personnel and appropriate HR policies are key aspects of a reorientation toward more quality.

It is not yet clear whether the IPQC initiative from outside the EPO will achieve what could not be achieved internally: to put patent quality back at the top of the agenda. The Staff Committee will report on the progress made (or lack thereof) in the coming weeks.

The Central Staff Committee
12 In accordance with Article 15 EPC and Article 143(2) for the administration of the European patent with unitary effect
13 “Depletion of the Workforce – Failure to recruit under the current administration”: CSC publication of 17/02/2023 (sc23020cp)
14 Five-year contracts, lowering of the standards for recruitment, the hiring of young professionals

The figures from the Directorate Quality Audit (DQA) [PDF] cannot be easily hidden like before. The Office tends to scuttle and bury any figures that don’t flatter “quality”. This one was originally published in proprietary Microsoft formats because the EPO is technically controlled by Microsoft. Sure, it’s illegal, but the EPO is run by liars and criminals, who choose liars and criminals as IT vendors. Campinos would help Bill Gates liberate his close friend Jeffrey Epstein from prison if he had the chance. These people are all effectively above the law.

So where’s the media in all this? Or politicians? Silence, as usual?

“MEPs are probably part of the problem and not just through passivity,” an associate of ours explains. “Media avoids anything even remotely related to technology policy, in any shape or form. That’s in part thanks to the Bill and Lolita slush fund which is used liberally to prevent such coverage lest people bring up the topic of software Freedom. Or of no-Microsoft software.”

The EPO’s Attack on ALL EPO Staff Explained Using a Parable/Analogy

Posted in Europe, Patents at 6:48 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Video download link | md5sum 99b58eb33ca1eb3a603ffae61d7568fc
EPO Togetherness
Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

Summary: The criminals who run the EPO (and also try to replace patent courts in the EU with unlawful and unconstitutional kangaroo courts) are attacking their very own staff as if the goal is to cause mass resignations or assign patent applications to depressed, besieged workers, unable to actually carry out the tasks in compliance with the European Patent Convention

THE “Bringing Teams Together” [sic] programme/initiative has been mentioned here a lot — several times last year and earlier this year. We spent a lot of time exploring what it meant to staff. It had become crystal clear that it was a coordinated action against examiners, likely connected to notorious union-busting strategies. Whose idea was this collective punishment? Some union-busting ‘consultancy’? One of the persons responsible for this travesty has since then left the Office and we can expect António Campinos to persist with this no matter the consequences and irrespective of the brain drain (that’s likely the goal; Benoît Battistelli already drove out many of the veteran examiners — those whom he did not illegally dismiss until their appeal reversed the decision of dismissal/demotion in 2018).

“China would have a field day if it knew what this supposedly ‘lucrative’ employer does to the workforce.”Shown below (and discussed above; I didn’t realise it would be satirical) is an essay that helps explain what EPO management is doing to all the staff; if the goal is to compel people to grant European software patents (leaks suggest so) and to not unionise, they’re being unrealistic. This will doom the entire patent office once both stakeholders and the general public catch up. Where are the politicians or so-called ‘representatives’ of voters? In Germany and its neighbouring countries they’re in the pockets of the abusers. The German government actively protects and hides the corruption at the EPO. Scandal of epic scale.

Here’s the full publication dated one week ago:

Zentraler Personalausschuss
Central Staff Committee
Le Comité Central du Personnel

Munich, 24/02/2023 (early as of 01/04/2023)

“Bringing our Family Together”

Best practices everywhere

Dear Colleagues,

“Bringing Teams Together” seems to have inspired some colleagues to make similar improvements in their home environment. For sure, the administration, and perhaps you, will be pleasantly surprised to read that our colleagues have transferred best practices from their workplace to their home.

The text we publish below was sent to us by a colleague – we would like to thank the anonymous author(s) for sharing it with us.

The Central Staff Committee


Bringing our Family Together

Dear colleagues,

I would like to inform you myself, before rumours start spreading around:

I have just asked my husband to move out of our family house where he’s been living with me and our small children.

First, he was shocked and wanted to know why. Then I explained to him that:

1.) This will decrease our family’s environmental footprint by 1/8 (12.5%). In order to make use of our family house in a sustainable way, we need to avoid leaving large areas of our house empty by reorganising our daily lives. By discarding one place to sleep and moving closer together, the top floor will be cleared and from now on remain empty. Thereby, power consumption will be reduced. In light of our family’s commitment to environmental sustainability and the efforts to reduce our energy consumption, it is neither viable nor socially responsible to leave large areas of our family house left empty. All of us can make a difference for the environment. We should work together towards a more sustainable future.

2.) This is part of our new family concept, which I call “Bringing our Family Together”. I told him that moving him out has the added benefit of keeping our family house vibrant and strengthening our sense of belonging by bringing our whole family together. It also gives us the flexibility to adapt to our changing needs.

I furthermore told him that preparations for this reorganisation are in full swing. Accommodation plans for the remaining family have been reviewed and as of 25 March, our children will begin to relocate within the house. The plans for his move out are to follow in due course.

When I showed him our “bringing family together” relocation plan with all our family member’s names filled in except for his name (which was evidently missing), he looked at me with this blank look, a mixture of unbelief and despair.

I assume that’s normal. Change is never easy. Being a loving and caring wife, personally, I actually do have some sympathy for him, of course. But as a family, we need to be professional. We need to adapt to our family’s changing needs. And we need to keep in mind our common goal, namely improving our effectiveness in order to strengthen our commitment to our family life. We all have to focus on what is best for our family and for our environment, not only as self-centered individuals but in a holistic, collaborative way.

Even though I had just informed him about the upcoming changes in a very kind and supportive manner, he nevertheless seemed negatively surprised and unsettled. He asked me whether the past 15 years spent together meant nothing to me and expressed concern that this change would exclude him from our family life.

Of course I found some warm-hearted words and kindly reassured him that he should not worry about any of this. I told him that:

1.) I really appreciate his past contribution. Here, I made a strong effort in listing all his achievements and contributions in house cleaning and years of childcare, so that he knows that his contribution is very much valued.

2.) He will continue this contribution in the future. I made it abundantly clear that his move out will neither affect his household responsibilities, nor the required level of cleaning performance. I informed him that from now on, he will come to our house in the morning and leave as soon as he has managed to finish all his household tasks for the day. I furthermore informed him that in addition to his previous tasks, he will get an increase of 15% additional tasks. Expected future improvements of our household devices warrant it. When he looked puzzled, I told him that he can do it. And that he will do it.

3.) Regarding his concerns that he will not have a place to be, I reassured him that while he is neither cleaning nor washing (which shouldn’t happen anyway, as there’s always plenty of work to be done), he can spend a few minutes break in one of our rooms, if not occupied by someone else. It will be his responsibility to check for time slots when the children are away from home, in order to find out when empty rooms are available. Evidently, child’s approval to make use of the room is to be obtained every time in advance, as a matter of courtesy.

4.) He was informed that he will be provided with a locker in the cellar where he can keep his house-cleaning tools (such as his vacuum cleaner and swiffer). He might even temporarily store some of his personal belongings there while doing the housework.

His reaction did not meet the expectations. After all the convincing and empathic explanations which I had provided to him, he still insisted on his presumption that he might not be a full-fledged member of our family any more. He even dared to ask me whether I might reconsider my decision (can you imagine?).

I told him that I would like nothing better. It’s just that I don’t have a choice. As much as I would love to reconsider, that is beyond my scope of decision. In order to achieve our common goals, his move out of our family house is inevitable. It is conditioned by our holistic goals of environmental sustainability and bringing our family closer together. It’s not my personal choice. There is nothing I can do about it. Things are the way they are.

When he looked at me in disbelief, I reminded him of how grateful he should be for having such a great family and me as a loving and caring wife.

I also reminded him how good we have it that none of our children needs to move out. It is an inevitable fact that we have to reduce the number of space occupied in our family house. There is nothing we can do about that, it is a fact. But we can make the best out of it. So through his move out, all our children will be able to stay in our house. After all, they are all pretty young, 5 years in average. So I reminded him to be thankful that together, we have found such a people-friendly and sustainable solution, which best accommodates the wishes of all family members. Now it is time to adapt. Together, we will create a vibrant and energizing collaborative family environment.

After I had said that, he became silent. He just looked at me with an incredulous expression on his face. Then he turned around without a word and left the room.

So I did not even have opportunity to tell him that any potential lack of personal contact with our children will be more than compensated by mandatory family meetings, which will greatly improve the team spirit and the personal relationships within our family.

Sometimes he is just so resistant to change. As I said before, somehow I even understand him. Change is never easy. But being responsible for our family, I cannot be sentimental. I need to ensure that he delivers according to expectations. So I will be very clear that this must not negatively impact his performance. And he will maintain and increase his cleaning performance, of that I am sure. He knows exactly what will happen if he does not. We both know. So there is no need to explicitly remind him.

Instead, I can focus on my future communication. After all, I should be perceived as the caring and loving wife who I actually am.

Fortunately, I have learned effective communication methods. First, I will give him time to speak and to raise his concerns, such that he will gain the impression of being heard. This, I have read between the lines of my communication training, will make him feel even more valued and respected and therefore will drive him to clean our family house even more.

Of course, any arguments put forward by him might not lead to actual changes or reconsiderations, as I am only a small being in the face of the universe, therefore always being bound by the circumstances that prevail. So my husband and I are both aware that nothing he might say will ever be taken into account, nor make any difference. Then how can I ensure to be perceived by my children as the caring and loving wife who I actually am?

I think I will just start repeating:

“How can I support you? What can I do for you?”

This is what I will say to my husband at every occasion, after he has been moved out of our family house in order to bring our family together. I am sure he will understand.

One might expect this in China, but this is happening not too far from the ICC and in Bavaria. China would have a field day if it knew what this supposedly ‘lucrative’ employer does to the workforce.

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources




Samba logo

We support

End software patents


GNU project


EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com

Recent Posts