There are a lot of people arguing that we should go back to the in-person exam. But that can only happen if some organisation is willing to organise it and/or pay for the organisation. To give you an idea, document CA/139/08 details the costs in 2007, and the projected increases as the costs rises. See below for a link to CA/139/08.
Updates on EPC, PCT, EPO case law and the e-EQE
Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the rejection of the opposition.
OP were scheduled for 08.09.2022 by summons issued on 26.11.2021.
On 12.08.2022 the parties were informed that the OP would be held by ViCo.
Following the summons, the opponent informed the board that it would speak English and requested simultaneous translation.
The three following cases in appeal after opposition have one thing in common: one of the parties referred to submissions made in opposition.
The BA do not like this way of doing.
The opponent appealed the decision of maintenance according to the MR filed during OP before the OD.
A list of 34 legal and 51 technical judges has been published.
Some names are not a surprise. The were known as being on a short list.
Some of the technical judges are not a surprise as they are well known for actions in litigation.
However some technical judges are a surprise.
In preparation of the OP to be held on 24.11.2022 in case G 2/21, the EBA has published a communication pursuant Art 13 and 14(2) RPEBA.
The question of plausibility is very important in chemistry/pharmacy and it is thus comprehensible that those industries want to keep the free evaluation of evidence as much as possible.