http://m.euractiv.com/details.php?aid=531655

As for the courses, yes, Hagen is undoubtedly more work than the two alternatives. But then again, since we are shooting in the dark, who could assume that the “heavier” course is the one with the most chances of success in being considered sufficient. And, worst case scenario, you are left with an LL.M., this not being the case for the other two.

From a cost perspective, Hagen and Nottingham are more or less in the same league. Costs for the CEIPI classes are not available on their website. Would you happen to know how much the CEIPI is?

Finally, one must consider that HAgen provides the opportunity to get familiar with the German legal language. Having seen the development of the court so far, I do expect most cases to be handled in Germany AND in German. I may be wrong, but if the past two years are of any use, they point toward such a conclusion.

Interesting also to see how the EPI is trying to push for a shorter way for national PA. This comes in different forms (points 11a and 11e for a complete exoneration and point 19 for a partial one), but the idea seems to be: national PA + EPA = no certificate (or less) required.

This seems to me to be aimed directly at German Patentanwälte. As true as it may be that they have enough qualifications for skipping some or all of the future PLC, I’d be very surprised indeed to see the court accepting a distinction between some national PA and some others. Similarly, I highly doubt that the court would be willing to let any national PA+EPA litigate alone in front of them.

As always, we shall see.

Thanks for the always useful updates.

As to the three different courses, Hagen certainly is more work than CEIPI. It is a two-years distant-learning program in German (examinations in Munich) concluding with a master thesis which appears to be a tough hurdle for some attendees. The CEIPI Litigation Diploma is a half-year course with one weekend (Friday to Sunday) each month in Strassbourg, as far as I know. However, other than at CEIPI, the Hagen course will earn you a full legal degree (LL.M.), which may justify the larger amount of work for some attendees.

I think one can optimise workload and benefit by taking the next CEIPI course in spring 2014. As CEIPI is closely connected with the EPO as they already offer EQE courses, it might be fair to assume that their course has very good chances to be approved.

I may be missing something, but the doc linked to by the “download” link above does not seem to contain any mention of Hagen, Ceipi or Nottingham. In fact, it seems to be a cover letter for a more detailed paper, which seems the one you are referring to. Would you happen to have the link to the paper?

Also, like I guess many others out there, I have been pondering which of those three I should enroll into. One can’t help but notice that they are rather different in scope, as well as in duration. While Hagen is two years, Nottingham is done with in less than 12 months. I can’t find any info concerning the CEIPI classes on their website, unfortunately.

This begs the question: will the EPI/UPC really consider them to be equivalent? Since we are all out there waiting for a clear indication on how best to spend something in the region of 10k€, it would be nice not to pick the wrong one.

Of course we can all wait and have clear instructions. But I think it’s fair to say that on one here wants to be the last to enroll, when the “correct” course is defined and fully booked. So I guess we will all have to take our chances. Still, the paper you are referring to, seems to be a as good an indication as one can get, so direct link would be much appreciated.

Thanks again and Regards,
Edoardo

1) For this reason the officially used Englisch terminology “European patent attorney” is inappropriate. The correct term should be “registered representative for EPO proceedings” or something similar.

2) I can not understand why the Swedish Patent Attorneys Board is explicitly mentioned in Rule 286 (1). It is new to me that Sweden is the center of gravitiy for patents in Europe. So, can someone tell me the reason for that?

Best regards, Mark