About the authors:
Oliver Herd is a trainee patent attorney at Appleyard Lees. Oliver studied medical biochemistry at the University of Manchester, after which he completed a PhD at the University of York and a postdoctoral position at Imperial College London. His academic background is interdisciplinary, having worked in the immunology, haematology, stem cell and oncology related fields. Oliver’s academic research has been published and presented internationally. He also has experience in industry, having worked for a major pharmaceutical company and in antibody manufacturing.
Jordan Tinkler is a trainee patent attorney at Appleyard Lees. Jordan holds first class honours bachelor’s and master’s degrees in physics from the University of Leeds. Jordan is currently in the process of completing his PhD in biophysics at the University of Leeds. His experience has given him a broad understanding of physics and biophysical systems, and an appreciation of the challenges that interdisciplinary projects can present.
On the 27 April 2023, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) hosted its annual student conference in Birmingham. The event aims to provide useful information and support to trainees on their route to qualification. This year Appleyard Lees had a large presence with a number of trainees in attendance, and several partners that hosted talks throughout the day.
Session 1 – Post Qualification Guidance
One such partner, Parminder Lally (Chair of CIPA’s Education Committee), started the conference off with welcomes and introductions before hosting the first session of the day, with three guest speakers; Emily Weal, Rose Hughes and Philip Lenden. Each shared their insights into the challenges that may arise once a trainee completes their last exam and crosses into the realm of qualified patent attorneys. The challenges discussed included gaining independence after working closely with a supervisor, the skills required in an in-house role vs. a private practice role, and the benefits of finding a mentor.
Session 2 – Introduction to the Informals and IPReg (Intellectual Property Regulatory Board)
This session provided a brief history of the Informals, explaining how they evolved from an informal (hence the name) group of trainees to an officially recognised CIPA committee that provides trainees and newly qualified attorneys with representation before the CIPA council. If you are interested in finding out more about the Informals, Appleyard Lees has a number of trainees on the Informals committee, who recently wrote a blog discussing their roles and how others can get involved.
The session also introduced the IPReg and provided a whistle-stop tour of the code of conduct that applies to patent attorneys and litigators, and outlined that although trainees are not technically bound by the code of conduct, not following it will likely affect their reputation. The take-home message was to take the IPREG Code of Conduct seriously and regularly refamiliarise with its content as good practice.
Session 3 – Managing stress in the workplace
After a break, it was time for Managing stress in the workplace by Penelope Aspinall from Jonathan’s Voice. Jonathan’s Voice is a charity set up in 2017 that aims to reduce the stigma associated with mental health and develop a mentally healthy workplace in partnerships and firms to ensure everyone can thrive. Penelope explained how occasional, acute stress in the workplace can be useful, but chronic, unchecked stress can have serious negative mental, physical and emotional consequences. If you are struggling with stress, please consider talking it through with someone, be it managers/HR, mentors, friends or colleagues. The mental health first aider service (informalswelfare@gmail.com) and other people/organisations can be found on the Informals page.
Session 4 – What’s BD got to with it?
This session, chaired by Parminder Lally (Partner, Appleyard Lees) and Michael Evans (BDforIP), outlined that business development (BD) is a vague umbrella term that includes any work that goes into retaining clients, growing client business, and winning new clients. It was noted that BD also involves improving your own reputation, both in your own firm and in others. Being known and liked builds trust which can, in turn, lead to new business. In some cases, the work put into BD may not pay off immediately. In fact, it’s generally better to approach BD with the mindset of building relationships, rather than with the aim of trying to win new business immediately.
Session 5 – New EQE
New EQE exams were discussed next by Appleyard Lees partner and chair of the EPI Professional Committee, Julia Gwilt. The current style of exams will run until 2024, after which a new format is expected to be implemented (the switchover date is yet to be finalised).
Following feedback from a consultation set up by the EPO-epi working group last year, the new format aims to better accommodate online examination by implementing modular exams to limit screen time and may eventually be offered more than once a year. The foundation paper will be designed to test legal knowledge and claim analysis and may be sat after 12 months in the profession. On passing the foundation paper, the remaining papers (M1, M2, M3 and M4) can be sat in the March of the following year(s), in any order or grouping. M1 will comprise assessing information for prosecution (e.g., prior art analysis, claim and description interpretation, communication with the EPO, and dealing with a client’s needs and instructions). M2 will be a legal paper that involves deciding which procedural steps to take in a given situation. M3 will consist of three separate parts: drafting, defending a patent/application and attacking patents. Finally, M4 will be based on advising a client, examining your strategic response to a given situation.
The enrolment deadline for March 2024 exams are 30 June 2023 and 04 September 2023 for the pre and main EQE respectively. For help preparing for EQE exams, see the Informals Advanced Lectures, Epi-learning (an online platform with workshops, tutorials and a student forum), the EPO Academy (courses and training materials for EQE candidates) and commercial providers that offer courses aiding preparation.
Session 6 – Moot Court
To finish the day, there was a Moot Court session. Chris Mercer took on the role of Judge to hear the cases of two competing sides, one team acting as defendant, and the other as claimant in a fictional case concerning Mr Sobs and Ms Bates. In this scenario, Mr Sobs initiated infringement action alleging that the use of Ms Bates’ apparatus infringed an existing patent by using a frame on an overhead projector apparatus. Ms Bates, in response, initiated revocation action, alleging that none of the claims in the patent were valid due to a lack of novelty or inventive step. During the trial, Kathryn Taylor and Joel Briscoe were called to act as witnesses. The audience, acting as Jury, voted in favour of Mr Bates. The moot court was a fun demonstration of what an IPEC court hearing could involve and provided important lessons on knowing the grounds for revocation of a patent in the UK; and the preferred way of arguing that an invention involves an inventive step in the UK.
After some closing remarks, the conference concluded with a canape and drinks reception where trainees could network with one another whilst enjoying some more tasty treats! The conference was a jam-packed day of information, discussions and socialising. It was great to meet trainees from other firms and discuss professional updates and information. If you are a trainee patent attorney and would like to attend the next one, keep an eye on the CIPA website for details.
