You are on page 1of 2

Ortssektion München . Local Section Munich .

Section locale de Munich
su15009mp – 0.2.1/0.3.2/0.2.2

How many patents does Europe need?
At the beginning of 2015, staff of the EPO is faced with demands for massive increases in
production (up to 20%) at the same time as a further worsening of their working conditions.
The EPO receives some 150.000 patent applications a year, of which roughly one-third (35
%) come from the EPO member states and two-thirds (65 %) from outside Europe 1 .
Despite the EPO’s very healthy financial situation2, Mr Battistelli’s main policy aim for the
Office seems to be to make it more “efficient”. According to staff, efficiency is not an aim
by itself: it is subordinated to the Office's duty, as a public service, to examine patent
applications thoroughly and to refuse any “bad” patents that would otherwise be a
nuisance, in particular for the many European small and medium-sized enterprises that
cannot afford expensive litigation. Mr Battistelli’s single-minded focus on “efficiency” and
cost cutting is not in the interest of Europe!
March to the Danish consulate
On 24 January 2015 some 1000 colleagues braved the freezing cold for a demonstration
in front of the Danish consulate in Munich. Staff reproaches the EPO’s Administrative
Council headed by Mr Kongstad, a Dane, for its failure to exercise due oversight over
the President of the EPO, its failure to fulfill its duty of care towards EPO staff by
allowing unacceptable employment law to be imposed on staff, and its lack of
transparency towards the EPO's users and the general public. More information here3.
The demonstration was reported in the Danish press.
The Danish newspaper “Jyllands-Posten” published a
rather critical article4 of 3 pages entitled “Raging war
at the EPO”. An English translation can be found by
scrolling through the document.
Wednesday 25 February 2015 - March to the British consulate
The next demonstration will be aimed at the British consulate. Mr Sean Dennehey5 (UK),
member of the British delegation, is a major player in the Administrative Council. He was
also recently re-elected 6 chairman of the Patent Law Committee for a three-year term,
starting on 30 March 2014. Like Mr Kongstad, Mr Dennehey is member of the “Board 28”,
In 2013 and 2014, the EPO had an operating surplus of over 300 million Euros.
Biography of Mr Sean Dennehey:
139th meeting of the AC:


epo. to ask for his support.pdf 2 . We hope to be able to meet the British Consul-General.7 Mr Dennehey actively supports and defends the reforms of Mr Battistelli. That is why we continue to defend   quality in search and examination as well as more transparency in the governance of the EPO.cipa. in his view.10h. Freedom of Association and Honest Negotiation of our work package. Priority on increased output should be the leading consideration. Ms Brimelow called for a measured approach in matters that are by essence of deep and long-term relevance. The Board 28 met this week to discuss and probably decide upon the future of DG3." [. SUEPO Munich "Mr Battistelli made it clear that. Mr Dennehey also supports the Office in trying to suppress8 public discussion about the suspension of a Member of the Boards of Appeal while leaving space for Mr Battistelli to express his view of the events behind closed doors. Paul Richard Heardman. we claim9 for    Rule of Law. We expect to arrive at the British consulate (Möhlstraße 5) at The demonstration will start in front of the Isar building on Wednesday 25 February at What does EPO staff want? http://www. But we do not forget the mission of the EPO as a public service created for the benefit of the citizens of Europe.. which increasingly deny EPO staff fundamental rights that are taken for granted by all other European citizens. We invite all staff to participate. however interesting.the ultra-secretive think-tank of the Administrative issues/news/2014/20140328.15h.] "Both Mr Battistelli and Mr Kongstad stressed that the March Council conclusions were clear enough to enable the rapid development of proposals. What are our claims? As with the previous are not enough to answer the priorities expressed by the Council. but rather for action and a real sense of urgency should prevail.suepo." Board 28 meeting of 6 May 2009 (B28/8/9) 7 8 9 139th meeting of the AC: http://www. We wish to alert the British government to the problems in the EPO and the role played by the British delegation. It is no longer time for consultation. action is now expected and that academic models and debates.html http://www.