A. Patentable inventions

Home
Legal texts
Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office
I. Patentability
A. Patentable inventions
2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

Overview

Foreword to the ninth edition

Detailed table of contents

A. Patentable inventions

1. Patent protection for technical inventions

1.1. Technical character of an invention

1.2. Separate and independently patentability requirements

1.3. Absolute and relative patentability requirements

1.4. Verification of the presence of an invention under Article 52(1) EPC

1.4.1 Assessment of the invention independently of the prior art

a) Earlier case law of the boards of appeal: the "contribution approach"

b) Abandonment of the "contribution approach"

c) Some consequences of abandoning the contribution approach

1.4.2 Technical considerations and technical implementations

1.4.3 Methods involving technical means

1.4.4 Methods used in a technical process carried out on a physical entity

1.4.5 Apparatus constituting a physical entity or concrete product

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

2.1. Introduction

2.2. Discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods

2.2.1 Discoveries and scientific theories

2.2.2 Mathematical methods

2.3. Aesthetic creations

2.4. Computer-implemented inventions

2.4.1 Introduction

2.4.2 Patentability of computer programs

2.4.3 Programs for computers and technical character

a) Further effects of programs for computers

b) Technical effect on a physical entity

c) Technical considerations: programming a computer

d) Technical considerations: implementation of a function on a computer system

e) Methods performed by a computer

f) Computer-implemented simulation methods

2.4.4 Claims on computer programs

a) Computer program recorded on the medium

b) Exclusion of computer programs under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

2.5. Schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business

2.5.1 Methods for doing business

2.5.2 Methods for performing mental acts

2.5.3 Word-processing

2.6. Presentations of information

2.6.1 User Interfaces

B. Exceptions to patentability

1. Introduction

1.1. Amendments made to Article 53 EPC as part of the EPC 2000 revision

1.2. Basic principles

2. Breaches of "ordre public" or morality

2.1. ‍‍Rule 28 EPC

2.1.1 Scope of exception under Rule 28(c) EPC

2.1.2 Scope of exception under Rule 28(d) EPC

2.1.3 Test date

2.2. ‍‍Article 53(a) EPC

2.2.1 Test date

2.2.2 Assessment of an objection according to Article 53(a) EPC

a) Difference from test under Rule 28(d) EPC

b) Concept of "morality" and "ordre public"

c) Donor consent

3. Patentability of biological inventions

3.1. Plants and plant varieties

3.1.1 Definition of the term "plant varieties"

3.1.2 Limits to patentability

3.2. Animals and animal varieties

3.3. Essentially biological processes

3.3.1 Essentially biological processes for the production of animals

3.3.2 Essentially biological processes for the production of plants

a) ‍‍G 2/07 and G 1/08

b) Patentable technical processes

3.3.3 Product claims for plants or plant material

3.4. Microbiological processes and the products thereof

3.4.1 The concept of "microbiological processes"

3.4.2 Difference between microbiological and genetic‑engineering processes

4. Medical methods

4.1. Introduction

4.2. Methods for treatment by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods

4.2.1 Distinction in the approach

4.2.2 Uniform approach: no need for practitioner involvement

4.3. Surgical methods

4.3.1 One surgical step in a multi-step method

4.3.2 Treatment by surgery not limited to surgery for a therapeutic purpose

4.3.3 Towards a new concept of "treatment by surgery"

4.3.4 "Treatment by surgery" in the case law since G 1/07

a) Surgical nature of a method step

b) Surgical step part of claimed method?

c) Apparatus claim – disguised method claim?

4.3.5 Avoiding the exclusion of methods of treatment by surgery from patent protection under Article 53(c) EPC

a) Claim cannot be left to encompass surgical step

b) Disclaimer

c) Methods only concerning the operation of a device

4.3.6 Data obtained during surgery

4.4. Therapeutic methods

4.4.1 The term "therapy"

a) Definition of the term

b) Application in the case law

4.4.2 Methods with both therapeutic and non-therapeutic indications

a) Inevitable and inextricably linked therapeutic effect of the claimed method

b) Therapeutic and non-therapeutic effects distinguishable

4.4.3 Avoiding the non‑patentability under Article 53(c) EPC of methods with therapeutic effect

4.5. Diagnostic methods

4.5.1 Opinion G 1/04 of the Enlarged Board of Appeal

a) What constitutes "diagnostic methods"

b) Involvement of practitioner

c) The criterion "practised on the human or animal body"

d) Clarity of a claim relating to diagnostic methods

e) Intermediate findings of diagnostic relevance

4.5.2 Case law applying the principles developed in G 1/04

2.2. Applications with same filing or priority date

2.3. Relevant date of documents

2.4. Prior rights – Article 54(3) EPC

2.4.1 European prior rights

2.4.2 Applicability of Article 54(3) EPC in cases of potentially colliding European parent and divisional applications

2.4.3 Excluded national prior rights

2.4.4 PCT applications as state of the art

2.5. Non-prejudicial disclosures under Article 55 EPC

2.6. In-house knowledge not published before the priority date

2.7. Prior art acknowledged in a patent application

2.8. Common general knowledge

2.8.1 Definition of "common general knowledge"

2.8.2 Patent specifications as common general knowledge

2.8.3 Specialist journals as common general knowledge

2.8.4 Databases as common general knowledge

2.8.5 Proof of common general knowledge

3. Availability to the public

3.1. General

3.2. Ways of making information available to the public

3.2.1 Publications and other printed documents

a) General

b) Company papers

c) Advertising brochure

d) Report available in the specialist field

e) Books

f) Instruction manual

g) Patent and utility models

h) Trade names

i) Abstracts of documents

3.2.2 Lectures and oral disclosure

3.2.3 Internet disclosures

a) General

b) Public availability of a document stored on the World Wide Web

c) Publication date

3.2.4 Public prior use

a) General

b) Public prior use occurred

c) No public prior use

d) Internal structure or composition of a product

3.2.5 Biological material

3.3. The concept of "the public"

3.3.1 Sale to a single customer

3.3.2 Making available to a person not skilled in the art

3.3.3 A limited circle of people

3.3.4 Public library

3.4. Obligation to maintain secrecy

3.4.1 General

3.4.2 Parts for serial production

3.4.3 Distribution of prospectuses, technical descriptions

3.4.4 Commercial inter-relationships and interests

3.4.5 Demonstrating products for presentation purposes

3.4.6 Presenting the product in writing

3.4.7 Making samples/products available for test purposes

3.4.8 Conferences

3.4.9 Public availability of documents submitted for standardisation

3.4.10 Joint venture and other commercial agreements

3.4.11 Paper submitted to obtain an academic degree

3.4.12 Medical field

3.4.13 Notary

3.5. Evidence

3.5.1 Burden of proof

3.5.2 Standard of proof

a) General

b) Public prior use

c) Internet – proof of the date of availability

4. Determining the content of the relevant prior art

4.1. General rules of interpretation

4.2. Combinations within a prior art document

4.3. Taking implicit features into account

4.4. Taking intrinsic features into account

4.5. Taking equivalents into account

4.6. Taking drawings into account

4.7. Taking examples into account

4.8. Broad claims

4.9. Deficiencies and mistakes in a disclosure

4.10. Accidental disclosure

4.11. Reproducibility of the content of the disclosure

5. Ascertaining differences

5.1. Comparing each individual item from the prior art

5.2. Distinguishing features

5.2.1 Difference in wording

5.2.2 Differences in values

5.2.3 Difference in parameters

5.2.4 Difference in composition

5.2.5 Functional features

5.2.6 Generic disclosure

5.2.7 Product claim with process features

5.2.8 Non-technical distinguishing features

6. Chemical inventions and selection inventions

6.1. General

6.2. Novelty of chemical compounds and groups of compounds

6.2.1 Anticipation of certain compounds

a) Definition of a substance by its structural formula or other parameters

b) Selection of starting substances from different lists

c) Selection on the basis of a general formula

6.2.2 Novelty of groups of substances

6.2.3 Novelty of enantiomers

6.2.4 Achieving a higher degree of purity

6.3. Selection of parameter ranges

6.3.1 Selection from a broad range

6.3.2 Overlapping ranges

6.3.3 Multiple selection

6.4. Subject-matter group

7. First and second medical use

7.1. First medical use

7.1.1 Introduction

7.1.2 Scope of a purpose-related product claim

7.1.3 Protection of a preparation in the form of a "kit-of-parts"

7.1.4 Further technical information as compared with the state of the art

7.2. Second (or further) medical use

7.2.1 Introduction

7.2.2 Transitional provisions

7.2.3 Purpose-limited product claims and Swiss-type claims – scope of protection

7.2.4 Novelty of the therapeutic application

a) General

b) New therapeutic application based on the group of subjects to be treated

c) New technical effect

d) Same illness

e) New dosage regimen

f) New therapy with a different mode of administration

g) Interpretation of "substance or composition"

h) Statement of purpose of surgical use for a known instrument

i) Discovery of a previously unknown property of a compound underlying the known effect

j) Whether there is a therapeutic method

8. Second (or further) non-medical use

8.1. Novelty criteria for use claims and process claims containing a purpose feature

8.1.1 General issues decided before the Enlarged Board of Appeal

8.1.2 Non-therapeutic treatment of animals

a) Non-therapeutic application

8.1.3 Applicability of G 2/88 and G 6/88 to process claims

a) General

b) Different treatment of use and process claims

c) Interpretation of process claims

d) Use of a known process for a particular purpose

e) Discovery of new properties/technical effects underlying the known use

f) Use of a substance to achieve a technical effect only attained in special circumstances

8.1.4 Statement of purpose in non-medical use claims in view of Article 52(4) EPC 1973

8.1.5 Novelty criteria for product claims with purpose characteristics

D. Inventive step

1. Introduction

2. Problem and solution approach

3. Closest prior art

3.1. Determination of closest prior art in general

3.2. Same purpose or effect

3.4. Most promising starting point

3.4.1 General

3.4.2 Most promising springboard

3.5. Further criteria for determining the closest prior art

3.5.1 Defective disclosure

3.5.2 Confidential disclosure in the application

3.5.3 Speculative character

3.5.4 Old prior art documents

3.5.5 Improvement of a production process for a known product

3.6. Consequences of choosing a certain starting point

4. Technical problem

4.1. Determination of the technical problem

4.2. Alleged advantages

4.3. Formulation of the technical problem

4.3.1 No pointer to the solution

4.3.2 Problem formulated in the patent application as starting point

4.3.3 Formulation of partial problems – lack of unity

4.4. Reformulation of the technical problem

4.4.1 General

4.4.2 Subsequently invoked technical effect

4.5. Alternative solution to a known problem

4.6. Solving a technical problem – post-published documents

5. "Could-would approach"

6. Ex post facto analysis

7. Expectation of success, especially in the field of genetic engineering and biotechnology

7.1. Reasonable expectation of success

7.2. Try and see situation

8. Skilled person

8.1. Definition of the skilled person

8.1.1 Definition

8.1.2 Competent skilled person – group of people as "skilled person"

8.1.3 Definition of the person skilled in the art in the field of biotechnology

8.1.4 Identification of the skilled person in the case of computer-implemented inventions

8.2. Neighbouring field

8.3. Skilled person – level of knowledge

8.4. Everyday items from a different technical field

9. Assessment of inventive step

9.1. Treatment of technical and non-technical features

9.1.1 Technical character of an invention

9.1.2 Inventions having both technical and non-technical features

9.1.3 Problem and solution approach when applied to "mixed" inventions

a) General issues

b) The Comvik approach

c) Non-technical features and technical contribution

d) Non-technical features and interaction with technical subject matter

e) Technical implementation of excluded subject-matter

9.1.4 The aim to be achieved in the formulation of the technical problem

9.1.5 Credible technical effects

9.1.6 Assesment of features relating to a presentation of information

a) Mental activities based on data visualisation

b) Display of data and user preferences

9.1.7 Assesment of features relating to meta methods for software production

9.1.8 Assesment of features relating to mathematical algorithms

9.2. Combination invention

9.2.1 Existence of a combination invention

9.2.2 Partial problems

9.3. Combination of teachings

9.4. Technical disclosure in a prior art document

9.5. Features not contributing to the solution of the problem

9.6. Substitution of materials – analogous use

9.7. Combination of documents

9.8. Chemical inventions

9.8.1 Problem and solution approach in chemical inventions

9.8.2 Structural similarity

9.8.3 Broad claims

9.8.4 Intermediate products

9.8.5 Predictable improvements resulting from amorphous forms as compared to crystalline forms

9.8.6 Synergistic effects

9.9. Equivalents

9.10. Selection inventions

9.11. Problem inventions

9.12. New use of a known measure

9.13. Obvious new use

9.14. Need to improve properties

9.15. Disclaimer

9.16. Optimisation of parameters

9.17. Small improvement in commercially used process

9.18. Analogy process – envisageable product

9.19. Examples of lack of inventive step

9.19.1 Foreseeable disadvantageous or technically non-functional modifications

9.19.2 Technical standards

9.19.3 Reversal of procedural steps

9.19.4 Purposive selection

9.19.5 Automation

9.19.6 Enhanced effect

9.19.7 Simplification of complicated technology

9.19.8 Choice of one of several obvious solutions

9.19.9 Several obvious steps

9.19.10 Selection from obvious alternatives

9.19.11 Putting the closest prior art device into practice

9.19.12 Animal testing and human clinical trials

10. Secondary indicia in the assessment of inventive step

10.1. General issues

10.2. Technical prejudice

10.3. Age of documents – time factor

10.4. Satisfaction of a long-felt need

10.5. Commercial success

10.6. Market competitors

10.7. Simple solution

10.8. Surprising effect – bonus effect

10.9. Comparative tests

E. The requirement of industrial application under Article 57 EPC

1. Notion of "industrial application"

1.1. Invention and industrial application

1.2. Any kind of industry

1.2.1 Methods applied in the private and personal sphere

1.2.2 Cosmetic and beauty salons

2. Reproducibility and sufficiency of disclosure

3. Indication of a profitable use of the invention in industry

II. Patent application and amendments

A. Claims

1. Basic principles

1.1. Purpose of claims under Article 84 EPC

1.2. Types of claim

1.3. Technical features

1.4. The examination of clarity in opposition proceedings

1.5. Clarity of claims and Article 83 EPC

2. Form, content and conciseness of claims

2.1. Form of claims: Rule 43(1) EPC

2.1.1 One-part or two-part claim

2.1.2 Two-part claims: preamble and characterising portion

2.2. More than one independent claim per category: Rule 43(2) EPC

2.2.1 Conditions

2.2.2 Burden of proof

2.2.3 No applicability in opposition proceedings

2.3. Conciseness and number of claims

2.4. Reference to the description or drawings: Rule 43(6) EPC

3. Clarity of claims

3.1. Introduction and general principles

3.2. Indication of all essential features

3.3. Clarity of broad claims

3.4. Functional features

3.5. Characterisation of an invention by a parameter

3.6. Unspecified features and relative qualities

3.7. Principles in connection with categories of claim

4. Disclaimer

5. Claims supported by the description

5.1. General principles

5.2. Restrictions on generalising the technical information and examples adduced in the description

5.3. Bringing the description into line with amended claims

6. Interpretation of claims

6.1. General principles

6.2. Meaning of terms and phrases: "comprising (substantially)", "consisting (essentially) of", "containing"

6.3. Using description and drawings to interpret the claims

6.3.1 General principles

6.3.2 Relevance of Article 69 EPC

6.3.3 Interpretation of ambiguous terms or confirmation of the text of a claim

6.3.4 Reading additional features and limitations into the claims

6.3.5 Use in the examination relating to the clarity requirement pursuant to Article 84 EPC

6.3.6 Definition of the scope of protection with regard to infringement not within the EPO's competences

7. Product-by-process claims

7.1. Introduction

7.2. Requirement that the claimed product must be patentable

7.3. Requirement that the claimed product cannot be described in any other way

7.4. Applicability of the principles for product-by-process claims to use claims

7.5. Combination of product and process features

7.6. Extension of protection conferred by product-by-process claims

8. Claims fees

8.1. Number of claims

8.2. Temporary change in the number of claims

8.3. No refund of claims fees

B. Unity of invention

1. Introduction

2. Unity in the context of different types of claims

2.1. Plurality of independent claims

2.2. Dependent claims

2.3. Intermediate products

3. Assessing lack of unity of invention

3.1. General approach – content of claims

3.2. Assessment of lack of unity at the search stage

3.3. Assessment of lack of unity and of requests for refund of further search fees in examination proceedings

3.4. No assessment of lack of unity in opposition proceedings

4. Criteria for determining lack of unity

4.1. Determination of the technical problem

4.2. Examination as to novelty and inventive step

5. The single general inventive concept

5.1. General

5.2. Special technical features and inventive character of the single general concept

5.3. Unity of single claims defining alternatives ("Markush claims")

6. Plurality of inventions – further search fees

6.1. Consequences of non-payment of a further search fee

6.2. Euro-PCT applications

6.2.1 Treatment of non-unity according to former R. 164 EPC

6.3. Applicability of Rule 64, (former) Rule 164(2) EPC or Rule 137(5) EPC

6.4. Dispensing with further search fee

C. Sufficiency of disclosure

1. Introduction

2. Date of compliance

3. Parts of the application relevant for assessing sufficiency of disclosure

3.1. Application as a whole

3.2. Alleged effect not a feature of the claims

4. Knowledge of skilled person relevant for assessing sufficiency of disclosure

4.1. The disclosure is aimed at the skilled person

4.2. References may also enable the skilled person to carry out an invention

5. Clarity and completeness of disclosure

5.1. General principles

5.2. Indication of at least 'one way'

5.3. Examples

5.4. Invention to be performed over whole range claimed

5.5. Parameters

6. Reproducibility

6.1. Repeatability

6.2. Hypothetical embodiments

6.3. Variants

6.4. Use to which invention is put

6.5. Reach-through claims

6.6. Reproducibility without undue burden

6.6.1 Occasional failure

6.6.2 Routine selection

6.6.3 Wrong citations

6.6.4 Forbidden area of the claims

6.6.5 Non-disclosed steps

6.6.6 Machine not available

6.6.7 Experiments

6.6.8 Measuring methods

6.6.9 Chemical compounds

6.7. Trial and error

6.8. Post-published documents

7. The requirement of sufficiency of disclosure in the biotechnology field

7.1. Clarity and completeness of disclosure

7.1.1 General

7.1.2 One way of implementing invention over whole scope of claim

7.1.3 Repeatability

7.1.4 Broad claims

7.2. Level of disclosure required for medical use – plausibility

7.3. Level of disclosure required for antibodies

7.4. Factors contributing to a finding of undue burden

7.5. Requirements relating to nucleotide and amino acid sequences

7.6. Deposit of living material

7.6.1 Substantive law questions

7.6.2 Procedural law questions

a) Conversion into deposit under the Budapest Treaty

b) Late submission of deposit number

8. The relationship between Article 83 and Article 84 EPC

8.1. ‍‍Article 83 EPC and support from the description

8.2. ‍‍Article 83 EPC and clarity of claims

9. Evidence

D. Priority

1. Introduction

2. Applications giving rise to a right of priority

2.1. Application filed in or for a state which is party to the Paris Convention or a member of the WTO

2.2. Right of priority of the applicant or his successor in title

2.2.1 General

2.2.2 Applicable law – proof of transfer

2.3. National deposit of industrial design

2.4. Exhibition priority

2.5. Postdating of the previous application

2.6. Multiple exercise of the right of priority for one contracting state

3. Identity of invention

3.1. Disclosure in the previous application of the invention claimed in the subsequent application

3.1.1 ‍‍G 2/98 – interpretation of "the same invention"

3.1.2 ‍‍G 2/98 and the concept of disclosure – interpretation in the same way as for Art. 123(2) EPC

3.1.3 Disclosure in the previous application as a whole

3.1.4 Reference to common general knowledge

3.1.5 Explicit or implicit disclosure of the features of the invention in the priority document

a) Example cases – features of the invention all disclosed in the priority document

b) Example cases – features of the invention not all disclosed in the priority document

3.1.6 Enabling disclosure in the priority document

3.1.7 Error margins and definitions of limits

3.1.8 Selection from generic disclosure

3.1.9 Inventions relating to nucleotide and amino acid sequences

3.2. Claiming in the subsequent application the invention disclosed in the previous application

4. First application in respect of the invention

4.1. Identity of invention

4.2. Identity of applicant

5. Partial and multiple priorities

5.1. Publications during the priority interval – effect on elements of the European patent application not entitled to priority

5.2. Different priorities for different parts of a European patent application

5.3. Multiple priorities or partial priority for one claim

5.3.1 Development of the case law after G 2/98 in respect of generically formulated "OR" claims

5.3.2 Referral case G 1/15 ("Partial priority")

5.3.3 Application of G 1/15 in the jurisprudence of the boards

E. Amendments

1. ‍‍Article 123(2) EPC – added subject-matter

1.1. General principles

1.2. Content of the application as filed: Parts of the application which determine the disclosure of the invention

1.2.1 Description, claims and drawings

1.2.2 Abstracts, titles, priority documents, parallel applications

1.2.3 Language issues

1.2.4 Cross-references to other documents

1.3. Standard for assessing compliance with Article 123(2) EPC

1.3.1 Gold standard: directly and unambiguously derivable

1.3.2 Standpoint of the skilled person

1.3.3 Implicit disclosure

1.3.4 Subject-matter not implicitly disclosed

a) Subject-matter merely rendered obvious by the content of the application

b) Results of reflection and imagination of the skilled person

c) General open-ended statement in description

1.3.5 Conditions insufficient for compliance with Article 123(2) EPC

a) Consistency with original disclosure

b) Reasonable plausibility of the included feature

1.3.6 Criteria not relevant for assessing compliance with Article 123(2) EPC

a) Obviousness

b) Indication in the description that subject-matter is known to the skilled person

c) Enabling disclosure

d) Limitation of scope of the original claim

1.3.7 Novelty test

1.3.8 Non-technical subject-matter

1.3.9 Claim interpretation when assessing compliance with Article 123(2) EPC

1.4. Removal or replacement of features from a claim

1.4.1 Broadening of claim – permissible within the limits of the original disclosure

1.4.2 Basis in the application as originally filed – gold standard

1.4.3 Omission of a feature presented as essential

1.4.4 The essentiality or three-point test

a) Decisions setting out and applying the test

b) Mere aid in assessing the allowability of amendments

c) Decisions criticising the three-point test

1.4.5 Removal of set of features

1.4.6 Removal of a feature indicating the intended purpose

1.4.7 Elimination of contradictions and inconsistencies

1.5. Ranges of parameters – setting upper and lower limits

1.5.1 Forming a range by combination of end-points of disclosed ranges

1.5.2 Forming a range with isolated value taken from example

1.5.3 Setting new end-point with not expressly disclosed value

1.6. Combination of features pertaining to separate embodiments or lists

1.6.1 Combination of features pertaining to separate embodiments; application as filed is not a "reservoir"

1.6.2 Selection from two lists – singling out a combination of features

1.6.3 Deletion of elements from lists – shrinking the lists without singling out a combination of features

1.7. Disclaimer

1.7.1 Definition

1.7.2 Standards for examining disclosed and undisclosed disclaimers

a) Principles established in G 1/03 and G 2/03 for undisclosed disclaimers

b) Principles established in G 2/10 for disclosed disclaimers

c) Explanations in G 1/16

1.7.3 Decisions applying the criteria established by the Enlarged Board in G 1/03 and G 1/16

a) Accidental anticipation

b) Drafting of disclaimers – disclaimer shall not remove more than is necessary

c) Drafting of disclaimers – disclaimer shall not remove less than is necessary

d) Drafting of disclaimers – delimitation against any potential prior art

e) Drafting of disclaimers – clarity

f) Undisclosed disclaimer must not be related to the teaching of the invention

g) Negative features

1.7.4 Decisions applying the criteria established by the Enlarged Board in G 1/10 – remaining subject-matter test

1.7.5 Applicability of the decisions of the Enlarged Board to cases already pending

1.8. Generalisations

1.8.1 Replacing specific feature with more general term – no inclusion of undisclosed equivalents

1.8.2 Generalisation and claim category

1.8.3 No generalisation of an effect obtained for particular embodiments

1.8.4 Amendments to preamble of claim by substituting general term for specific term

1.9. Intermediate generalisations

1.10. Specific derived from generic

1.10.1 Specific term or embodiment derived from generic disclosure

1.10.2 Component of entity derived from entity

1.10.3 Restricting a generic definition of a substituent to a specific (individual) one

1.10.4 Multiple arbitrary selection

1.11. Additions

1.11.1 Addition to the claim of a feature taken from drawings

1.11.2 Addition to the claim of an isolated feature taken from description

1.11.3 Addition to the claim of features originally presented as prior art

1.11.4 Addition to the claim of features previously described as non-essential

1.11.5 Adding prior art citations to the description

1.11.6 Addition of advantages and effects to the description

1.11.7 Addition/change of claim category

1.11.8 Insertion of an ambiguous feature in the claim

1.11.9 Characteristic described for intermediate product added to the claimed end product

1.12. Errors in the disclosure

1.12.1 Calculation errors

1.12.2 Incorrect structural formula

1.12.3 Amendment based on erroneous figure in the disclosure

1.12.4 Incorrect information in earlier application as filed but correct information directly and unambiguously derivable

1.13. Disclosure in drawings

1.14. Amending the description

1.14.1 Amendment to provide support for unsupported claim

1.14.2 Impact on the claimed subject-matter

1.14.3 Adding prior art citations to the description

1.14.4 Shift in the interpretation of a claim by amendment of the description

1.14.5 Shift in the information provided by the examples after amendment of claims

1.14.6 Reformulation of the technical problem

1.14.7 Replacement of complete description and drawings

1.14.8 Deletion from the description of expressions making features optional

1.15. "Comprises", "consists of", "consists essentially of", "contains"

1.16. Different sets of claims for different contracting states

2. ‍‍Article 123(3) EPC – extension of the protection conferred

2.1. Purpose of Article 123(3) EPC

2.2. Totality of claims

2.3. Extent of protection

2.3.1 ‍‍Article 123(3) EPC and Article 69 EPC

2.3.2 Cut-off point

2.3.3 General claim interpretation

2.4. Deletions and replacements

2.4.1 Deletion of a limiting feature in a claim

2.4.2 Deletion of important feature from description where claim remains unchanged

2.4.3 Deletion of examples for a general feature in a claim

2.4.4 Deletion of disclaimer referring to trade names

2.4.5 Deletion of a drawing

2.4.6 Deletion of feature in a claim mentioned "in particular"

2.4.7 Deletion of a "preferred" feature in a claim

2.4.8 Reducing scope of claim by adding embodiments to a negative feature

2.4.9 Replacement of a restrictive term by a less restrictive term

2.4.10 Replacement of an inaccurate technical statement in a claim

2.4.11 Replacement of "cell of a plant" by "plant"

2.4.12 Replacement of substance by device containing substance or substance with mechanical device

2.4.13 Replacement by aliud

2.4.14 Narrowing down a generic class or list of chemical compounds; open claims ("comprising"); sequential drafting ("cascade")

2.4.15 Replacement of drawings

2.5. Transposition of features within claims

2.6. Change of claim category

2.6.1 From product claim to a claim directed to the use of the product

a) Different categories of use claims

b) From product claim to a claim directed to using a product to achieve an effect

c) From product claim to a claim directed to using a product for producing another product – Article 64(2) EPC

2.6.2 From product or product-by-process claim to a claim directed to a process for manufacturing/preparing the product, and vice versa

2.6.3 From a product claim to a product-by-process claim

2.6.4 From method claim for treating the human body by therapy to product claim

2.6.5 From use claim to process claim, and vice versa

2.6.6 From use claim to Swiss-type claim

2.6.7 From Swiss-type claim to purpose related product claim under Article 54(5) EPC

3. Relationship between Article 123(2) and Article 123(3) EPC

3.1. Inescapable trap

3.2. Attempts to resolve the conflict

3.3. Addition to the claim of an undisclosed feature limiting protection conferred, without providing a technical contribution

4. Correction of errors in the description, claims and drawings – Rule 139 EPC

4.1. Relationship of Rule 139 EPC with Article 123(2) and (3) EPC

4.2. Obviousness of the error and the correction

4.2.1 Documents to be taken into account for the assessment of obvious error and correction

4.2.2 Obvious error – incorrect information objectively recognisable

4.2.3 Obvious correction – immediately evident that nothing else would have been intended than what is offered as the correction

4.3. Correction of errors in the description, claims and drawings after grant, and in opposition proceedings

5. Evidence and standard of proof for allowing amendments and corrections

F. Divisional applications

1. Introduction

2. Subject-matter of a divisional application

2.1. Subject-matter extending beyond content of the earlier application

2.1.1 Directly and unambiguously derivable from content of earlier application as filed

2.1.2 Sequence of divisionals – derivable from each of the preceding applications as filed

2.1.3 Language issues

2.2. Amendments to divisional applications

2.3. Subject-matter of a patent granted on a divisional application

2.3.1 Findings of G 1/05 and G 1/06 also applicable to granted patents

2.3.2 Ground for opposition under Article 100(c) EPC

2.4. Link between subject-matter of earlier application and divisional application

2.4.1 No abandonment of subject-matter in earlier application if divisional is filed

2.4.2 No effect on content of divisional application if earlier application has lapsed

2.4.3 Final decision on subject-matter in the parent application – res judicata

a) Decisions affirming cross-procedural res judicata effect

b) Decisions leaving open the question of cross-procedural res judicata effect

c) Decisions doubting cross-procedural res judicata effect

2.4.4 Re-filing of same subject-matter

3. Filing a divisional application

3.1. Right to file a divisional application

3.1.1 Applicant of earlier application entitled to file divisional application

3.1.2 Filing of divisional application during stay of proceedings

3.1.3 Joint applicants

3.1.4 No obligation to postpone a decision to allow the filing of a divisional application

3.2. Filing date attributed to divisional application

3.3. Language for filing divisional application

3.4. Divisional application to be filed with EPO

3.5. Requirement of pending earlier application

3.5.1 Requirement of pending earlier application sets no time limit

3.5.2 Pendency before the EPO

3.5.3 Pendency in case of grant of earlier application

3.5.4 Pendency in case of refusal of earlier application against which no appeal was filed

3.5.5 Pendency in case of refusal of earlier application against which an appeal was filed

3.5.6 Pendency in case of deemed withdrawal of earlier application and request for re-establishment

3.5.7 Pendency in case of deemed withdrawal of earlier application and no reaction to loss of rights communication under Rule 112(1) EPC

3.5.8 Pendency in case of withdrawal of earlier application

3.6. Time limits under Rule 36(1)(a) and (b) EPC in the version in force between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2014

3.6.1 Changes to Implementing Regulations

3.6.2 Interpretation of Rule 36(1)(a) and (b) EPC

4. Procedural questions

4.1. Procedural independence of divisional application

4.2. Designation of contracting states in a divisional application

4.2.1 Deemed designation of all states designated in earlier application at the date of filing of divisional

4.2.2 Payment of fee for each designated State – case law concerning situation prior to 1 April 2009

4.3. Correction of errors in a divisional application

4.4. Search fee for a divisional application

5. Double patenting

5.1. No legitimate interest in grant of a second patent claiming same subject-matter

5.2. Different subject-matter and scope of protection; overlapping subject-matter

5.3. Double patenting objection in opposition

III. Rules common to all proceedings before the EPO

A. The principle of the protection of legitimate expectations

1. Applicability of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations

1.1. Sources of legitimate expectations

1.2. Limits of the legitimate expectations principle

1.2.1 Knowledge of the relevant legal provisions and the case law

1.2.2 Interpretation of substantive patent law

1.2.3 Weighing of interests in inter partes cases

1.2.4 Area of party's own responsibility

1.2.5 Administrative notice with no legal consequences

1.3. Causal link and the requirement of proof

2. Information provided by EPO

2.1. Clear and unambiguous communications and forms

2.2. Information provided as courtesy service

2.3. Contradictory acts

2.4. Information provided by telephone

2.5. Decisions of the department of first instance

2.6. Correction of already issued decision

2.7. Information provided in the Guidelines

3. Obligation to draw attention to easily remediable deficiencies

3.1. General principle

3.1.1 Deficiency correctable within the relevant time limit

3.1.2 Obligation to set new time limit

3.2. Examples of cases addressing the obligation to draw attention to easily remediable deficiencies

3.2.1 Language issues

3.2.2 Missing or insufficient fee payments

3.2.3 Electronic filing of documents

3.2.4 Further examples involving easily identifiable deficiencies

3.3. Limits of the obligation to draw attention to easily remediable deficiencies

3.3.1 Area of party's own responsibility

a) Filing of valid appeal

b) Filing of divisional application

c) Bank account information

3.3.2 No obligation to scrutinise submissions for deficiencies

4. Obligation to enquire in case of unclear nature of request

5. Legitimate expectation and case law

5.1. Case law deviating from or overruling the practice

5.2. Point in time from which a new decision which deviates from existing practice becomes generally applicable

B. Right to be heard

1. Introduction

2. The right to be heard under Article 113(1) EPC

2.1. Violation of the right to be heard examined ex officio

2.2. Causal link between the violation of the right to be heard and the final decision

2.2.1 Appeal proceedings

2.2.2 First instance proceedings

2.3. Surprising grounds or evidence

2.3.1 General principles

2.3.2 The meaning of "grounds or evidence"

2.3.3 Opportunity to comment on evidence

2.3.4 Documents supplied by applicants but used against them

2.3.5 Document cited containing information already known

2.3.6 Reliance on the International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER)

2.3.7 Change of provisional opinion

2.3.8 Statement of grounds of appeal not received by respondent

2.4. Consideration of the parties' arguments, submissions and evidence

2.4.1 General principles

2.4.2 Decision must demonstrably show that arguments were heard and considered

2.4.3 No obligation to address each and every argument

2.4.4 Failure to consider submissions made after a communication

2.4.5 Failure to consider evidence

2.4.6 Mere reference to jurisprudence

2.5. The right to be heard and the timing of decisions

2.5.1 Decision could not be expected

2.5.2 Issuing of decision before expiry of time limit to comment

2.5.3 Immediate refusal after communication

2.5.4 Invitation to oral proceedings at short notice

2.6. The right to be heard in oral proceedings

2.6.1 Introduction of a new claim or relevant document

a) Cases in which Article 113(1) EPC was violated in relation to the introduction of new claims or relevant documents

b) Cases in which Article 113(1) EPC was not violated even though new claims or relevant documents were introduced

c) Cases where no new claims or relevant documents were introduced

2.6.2 Introduction of new arguments

2.6.3 Introduction of a new ground of opposition by the opposition division

2.6.4 Hearing witnesses

2.6.5 Oral submissions of an accompanying person

2.7. The right to be heard in case of the non-attendance of oral proceedings

2.7.1 Facts and evidence put forward for the first time during oral proceedings in inter partes cases – G 4/92

2.7.2 Non-attendance at oral proceedings before the boards – case law on G 4/92

2.7.3 Non-attendance at oral proceedings before the boards – Article 15(3) RPBA 2007

a) Ex parte proceedings

b) Inter partes proceedings

2.8. Changes in the composition of the opposition division after oral proceedings

3. Text submitted or agreed by applicant (patent proprietor) – Article 113(2) EPC

3.1. General

3.2. The requirement of a text submitted by the applicant

3.3. The requirement of a text agreed by the applicant

3.4. Cases where the EPO is uncertain or mistaken about the approval of the text

C. Oral proceedings

1. Introduction

2. Right to oral proceedings

2.1. Right to oral proceedings in examination, opposition and appeal proceedings

2.1.1 Right to oral proceedings even after a Rule 71(3) EPC communication

2.1.2 Right to oral proceedings even if no new arguments are presented

2.1.3 No right to telephone conversation

2.2. Right to oral proceedings before the Receiving Section

3. Oral proceedings at the instance of the EPO

3.1. Expediency of oral proceedings

3.2. Obligation to attend oral proceedings taking place at the instance of the EPO

3.3. Effects of withdrawal of a request for oral proceedings in case of oral proceedings at the instance of the EPO

4. Request for oral proceedings

4.1. Doubt as to the nature of the request for oral proceedings

4.2. Wording of request

4.2.1 Wording constituting a request

4.2.2 Wording not constituting a request

4.3. Withdrawal of request for oral proceedings

4.3.1 General principle: withdrawal only by virtue of a clearly expressed intention not to proceed with the request

4.3.2 Announcing non-attendance

4.3.3 Lack of any statement of grounds of appeal followed by lack of response to a notification of the inadmissibility of the appeal

4.4. Further oral proceedings before the same department

4.4.1 Same subject of proceedings

4.4.2 Not the same subject of proceedings

4.5. Auxiliary request for oral proceedings

4.6. No oral proceedings in spite of unconditional request

4.7. Request for oral proceedings in relation to further prosecution proceedings after remittal

4.8. Request for oral proceedings as a reply to a communication

5. Non-attendance at oral proceedings

5.1. Right to present comments and non-attendance of a party by choice

5.2. Non-attendance of party who filed new claims without amended description before oral proceedings; no reason for postponement of ruling

5.3. Obligation to give notice if not attending oral proceedings

6. Preparation of oral proceedings

6.1. Fixing or changing the date for oral proceedings

6.1.1 Legal provisions and notices

6.1.2 Request for changing the date of oral proceedings

6.1.3 Request or reasons for postponement filed too late

6.1.4 Reasons submitted in a request for postponement

a) Serious illness

b) Booked holidays

c) Speaking at a conference

d) Business trips

e) National holiday

f) Newly appointed representative

g) No legal representative appointed

h) Absence of duly represented party or of inventor

i) Postponement because of late receipt of board's communication

j) New evidence or requests

k) Proceedings before a national court

l) Postponement in order to avoid adverse decision of the board

m) Ongoing takeover negotiations between both parties

n) Expected childbirth by the partner of the professional representative

6.1.5 Obligation to give reasons why representative cannot be substituted

6.1.6 Postponement of the oral hearing at the instigation of the EPO

6.2. Notice of two months in the summons

6.3. Final date for written submissions in the preparation for oral proceedings and late submission of new facts and evidence – Rule 116 EPC

6.3.1 Examination and opposition proceedings

6.3.2 Appeal proceedings

6.4. Communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2007

6.4.1 Purpose of communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2007

6.4.2 Boards not bound by communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2007

6.4.3 Boards' discretion to send communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2007

6.5. Location of oral proceedings

7. Conduct of oral proceedings

7.1. Length and structuring of oral proceedings

7.1.1 Speaking time during oral proceedings and interruptions by the board

7.1.2 Oral proceedings scheduled from the start for more than one day

7.1.3 Continuation of oral proceedings beyond the last scheduled day

7.1.4 Duration of deliberations

7.2. Excluding the public from oral proceedings

7.3. Oral proceedings held by video-conference

7.4. Computer-generated presentations and other visual aids

7.5. Sound recording

7.6. Handwritten amendments during oral proceedings before the board

7.7. Interpreting in oral proceedings

7.8. Oral submissions by an accompanying person

7.9. Closing the debate

7.10. Minutes of oral proceedings (Rule 124 EPC)

7.10.1 Content of minutes

7.10.2 No recording of statements for use in subsequent national proceedings

7.10.3 Correction of minutes

7.10.4 Signing of minutes

7.10.5 Refusal to record statement not an infringement of the right to be heard

7.11. Presence of assistants during deliberations of the board

8. Costs

8.1. Apportionment of costs

8.2. Interpreting costs during oral proceedings

D. Time limits, further processing and interruption of proceedings

1. Calculation, determination and extension of time limits

1.1. Calculation of time limits under Rule 131 EPC

1.2. Determination and extension of periods under Rule 132 EPC

1.2.1 Relevant criteria when time limits are extended upon request (R. 132(2), second sentence, EPC)

1.2.2 Applicability of Rule 132 EPC to the Rules relating to Fees

1.3. Extension of time limits ipso jure on account of public holidays or dislocation in delivery of mail (Rule 134 EPC)

1.3.1 Public holidays (Rule 134(1) EPC)

1.3.2 General dislocation or interruption in delivery or transmission of mail in a Contracting State (R. 134(2) EPC)

1.3.3 Dislocation of a mail service outside the contracting states (Rule 134(5) EPC)

1.4. Statutory periods of grace, additional period for payment of renewal fees and the fiction of observance of a time limit for fee payments

1.4.1 Additional period for payment of renewal fees under Rule 51(2) EPC

1.4.2 Period of grace for payment of fees under Rule 85a EPC 1973

1.4.3 Fiction of fee payment in due time pursuant to Article 7(3) and (4) RFees

2. Further processing under Article 121 EPC

3. Interruption of proceedings under Rule 142 EPC

3.1. Application of Rule 142 EPC by the EPO of its own motion

3.2. Concept of legal incapacity (Rule 142(1)(a) and (c) EPC)

3.3. Determining legal incapacity of the applicant or patent proprietor for the purpose of Rule 142(1)(a) EPC

3.4. Determining legal incapacity of the representative for the purpose of Rule 142(1)(c) EPC

3.5. Legal incapacity of a representative from outside the contracting states

3.6. Interruption of proceedings because of insolvency (Rule 142(1)(b) EPC)

3.7. Consequences of interruption of proceedings (Rule 142(4) EPC)

E. Re-establishment of rights

1. Introduction

2. Right to file request for re-establishment of rights

2.1. Exception for opponent – time limit for filing statement of grounds of appeal

2.2. Re-establishment only in cases of failure to observe a time limit for which it was for the applicant to observe

3. Non-observance of time limit directly causing a loss of right

3.1. The meaning of "time limit"

3.1.1 Requirement of pendency when filing divisional application is not a time limit

3.1.2 Designation of States

3.1.3 "Time limitation" condition for requests for correction

3.2. Time limits excluded from re-establishment under Article 122(4) EPC and Rule 136(3) EPC

3.3. Time limits concerning the PCT proceedings

3.4. Loss of rights as a direct consequence by virtue of the EPC

4. Admissibility of requests for re-establishment of rights

4.1. Time limits for filing a request for re-establishment (Rule 136(1) EPC)

4.1.1 Two-month time limit from the removal of the cause of non-compliance

a) Removal of the cause of non-compliance

b) Responsible person

c) Legal fiction of deemed notification

4.1.2 One-year time limit following the expiry of the unobserved time limit

4.2. Inability to observe a time limit

4.2.1 Deliberate act missing a time limit; tactical considerations

4.2.2 Financial difficulties

4.3. Making good the omitted act

4.4. Substantiation of the request for re-establishment

4.5. Number of re-establishment fees due where more than one time limit is missed

4.6. Correction of deficiencies in the request for re-establishment

5. Merit of request for re-establishment of rights

5.1. Submissions to be taken into account

5.2. General comments on due care

5.3. Exceptional circumstances

5.3.1 Organisational restructuring

5.3.2 Change to or withdrawal of representation

5.3.3 Complex transfers of company ownership

5.3.4 Monitoring or computer systems matters

5.3.5 Sudden serious illness and severe psychological stress

5.4. Isolated mistake within a satisfactory system for monitoring time limits or for processing mail

5.4.1 "Isolated mistake" by representative

5.4.2 A system operating efficiently for many years as evidence that it is normally satisfactory

5.4.3 Cause of mistake remains unclear

5.4.4 Requirement for a cross-check

a) Cross-check should be independent in a large firm

b) Control mechanisms in small firms

5.4.5 All due care in making provisions for staff absences

5.4.6 Second mistake by responsible person

5.4.7 Deficiencies in computerised systems

5.5. Persons required to exercise due care; requirements regarding due care

5.5.1 Due care on the part of the applicant

a) General principles

b) Unrepresented individual applicant

c) Choosing a sufficiently competent representative

5.5.2 Due care on the part of the professional representative

a) Communication between professional representatives and their clients, the EPO or other representatives

b) Payment of renewal fees

c) Ignorance of or erroneous interpretation of a provision of the EPC

d) Requesting and acting on information from the EPO

e) Starting work on a case close to the expiry of the time limit

f) Designation of receiving offices

g) Abandonment of application

5.5.3 Due care on the part of a non-authorised representative

5.5.4 Due care in dealing with assistants

a) Introduction

b) Selection, instruction and supervision

c) Technically qualified assistants

d) Substitutes replacing assistants

e) Ultimate responsibility of the representative

5.5.5 Due care in using mail delivery services

6. Procedural treatment of requests for re-establishment

6.1. Department competent to decide upon the request

6.2. Request for re-establishment as auxiliary request

6.3. Parties to re-establishment proceedings and the right to be heard

6.4. Concurrent request for interruption of proceedings

6.5. Re-establishment in the context of the President's extension of time limits during general disruption

6.6. Redundant request for re-establishment

7. Rights of use under Article 122(5) EPC

8. Principle of proportionality

9. Reimbursement of the fee for re-establishment

9.1. Legal reason for payment of fee

9.2. Reimbursement where request for re-establishment found to be redundant

9.3. Request for re-establishment due to mistakes made by EPO

9.4. Reimbursement where more than one fee for re-establishment has been paid

F. Languages

1. Language of filing and date of filing of a European patent application

2. Language of the proceedings

3. Derogations from the language of the proceedings in written proceedings and in oral proceedings

4. Language privilege

5. Translations

6. Language-related fee reductions

6.1. European patent application

6.2. Request for examination

G. Law of evidence

1. Introduction

2. Admissible evidence

2.1. Non-exhaustive list of admissible means of evidence

2.2. Witness testimonies and expert opinions

2.2.1 Hearing witnesses

a) Role of witnesses and wording of request

b) Relationship between witness and party

c) Statutory declarations and hearing witnesses

d) Ranking of means of evidence

e) Hearing a witness before a national court

f) References

2.2.2 Difference between witnesses and experts

2.2.3 Expert opinions (Article 117(1)(e) EPC)

2.3. Statements in writing

2.3.1 Sworn statements and affidavits

2.3.2 Relationship between witness and party

2.3.3 Statutory declarations and hearing witnesses

2.3.4 Ranking of means of evidence

2.3.5 Miscellaneous

2.4. Other documents

3. Taking of evidence

3.1. Relevance of the evidence

3.2. Time frame for submitting evidence

3.3. Right to be heard

4. Evaluation of evidence

4.1. Principle of free evaluation of evidence

4.2. Probative value of evidence on a case-by-case basis

4.2.1 Witness testimony and written statements

a) Credibility of allegedly linked witnesses

b) Evaluation of evidence by the department of first instance

c) Events long past

d) Contradictory or consistent testimony

e) Witness testimony and national proceedings

f) Obligation to raise objections under R. 106 EPC

4.2.2 Test and experimental evidence

a) Test methodology and probative value

b) Evaluation of tests cited to prove that problem solved (Art. 56 EPC)

c) Evaluation – other tests

4.2.3 Archives and internet publications

4.2.4 Other written evidence

4.3. Standard of proof

4.3.1 General – "Balance of probabilities"

4.3.2 Public prior use

a) Both parties have access to the evidence : balance of probabilities

b) Evidence within the sphere of the opponent: beyond any reasonable doubt

c) Miscellaneous – evaluation in the case law

4.3.3 Posters and ephemeral presentations

4.3.4 Public availability of prior art documents

a) Commercial brochures

b) Convincing the board and discussion on the standard of proof

c) Archives and internet publications

4.3.5 Claiming a valid priority

4.3.6 Abusive conduct

4.3.7 Receipt of formal documents

5. Burden of proof

5.1. Apportioning the burden of proof

5.1.1 General

5.1.2 Individual cases

a) Novelty

b) Inventive step

c) Sufficiency of disclosure

d) Content of the priority document

e) Specific case of internet citations of prior art

f) Receipt of formal documents

5.2. Shifting the burden of proof

5.2.1 General

5.2.2 Cases in which the burden of proof was reversed

5.2.3 Cases in which the burden of proof was not reversed

H. Interpretation of the EPC

1. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

1.1. Principles of interpretation of the Vienna Convention

1.1.1 The interpretation of good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning

1.1.2 Supplementary means of interpretation

1.1.3 Interpretation of exclusions from patentability under the Vienna Convention

1.2. Application of the rules of interpretation

1.2.1 Grammatical interpretation

1.2.2 Systematic interpretation

1.2.3 Teleological interpretation

1.2.4 Subsequent agreement or practice

1.2.5 Secondary considerations

2. Interpretation of the EPC affected by TRIPS Agreement

2.1. General

2.2. Elements to be taken into consideration by the boards of appeal

3. The European Convention on Human Rights

4. Impact of national decisions on the case law of the boards of appeal

4.1. The duty of the boards of appeal to interpret and apply the EPC

4.2. Effects on the case law due to the differences between national legislation and the EPC

4.3. National decisions: no binding effect on the boards of appeal

5. Decisions of the Administrative Council: boards of appeal not formally bound

6. Implementing Regulations

7. Changes in relation to an established practice and interpretation

8. Interpretation of the various language texts of the EPC (Article 177 EPC)

I. Main and auxiliary requests

1. Possibility of filing auxiliary requests

2. Order of requests

3. Admissibility of requests

3.1. Party's responsibility to define subject-matter by filing appropriate requests

3.2. Requests of equal ranking

3.3. Requesting further opportunity to formulate new requests

3.4. Admissibility of late-filed requests

4. Obligation to give reasons for refusal of each request

5. Withdrawal of request

6. Examination procedure

6.1. Direct rejection of auxiliary request by examining division

6.2. Rejection in advance of further request by examining division

6.3. Practice of proposing one main and one or more auxiliary requests

7. Interlocutory decision on allowable auxiliary request – distinction between examination proceedings and opposition proceedings

8. Opposition procedure

9. Appeal procedure

J. Suspected partiality

1. General principles

1.1. Exclusion and objection

1.2. Rationale and importance

1.3. The European Convention on Human Rights

1.4. "Subjective" and "objective" test, presumption of impartiality

1.5. Parties' right to have their case decided by the judge designated by law

1.6. Applicability of Article 24 EPC to first-instance proceedings

1.7. Applicability of Article 24 EPC to disciplinary proceedings

2. Initiation of partiality proceedings and other procedural issues

2.1. Notices of self-recusation

2.2. Objection by other board members of the same board of appeal

2.3. Objection by a party

2.4. Objection by a third party

3. Admissibility

3.1. Competence of the board in its original composition

3.2. Obligation to raise the objection immediately

3.3. Objection must be reasoned and substantiated

3.4. Objection based on an obviously wrong understanding of the board's procedural obligations, the right to be heard and the principle of a fair trial

3.5. Repetition of a previous objection

3.6. Dual function as members of the Enlarged Board and another board of appeal

4. Suspected partiality of members of the departments of first instance

4.1. Competence to decide

4.2. Remittal and rehearing of a case

4.3. Personal interest

4.4. Disqualifying partiality

5. Suspected partiality of members of the boards of appeal

5.1. Grounds for exclusion under Article 24(1) EPC

5.1.1 Previous involvement of a board member as a party's representative

5.1.2 Participation in the decision under appeal

5.2. Grounds for objection under Article 24(3) EPC

5.2.1 Expressions of opinions on legal issues

5.2.2 Disqualifying partiality

5.2.3 Discretionary procedural decisions negatively affecting a party

5.2.4 Statement of grounds of objection defines the factual scope of the objection

5.2.5 ‍‍Article 24(3) EPC objection under Article 112a(2)(a) EPC

5.3. Comments of the board member concerned

6. Suspected partiality of members of the Enlarged Board of Appeal

6.1. Referral proceedings under Article 112 EPC

6.1.1 Previous participation in cases as members of the boards of appeal

6.1.2 Expressions of opinion on legal issues

6.2. Petition for review proceedings under Article 112a EPC

6.2.1 Previous participation in cases as members of the boards of appeal

6.2.2 Expressions of opinion on legal issues

6.2.3 Suspected partiality of the Chairman of the Enlarged Board of Appeal who at the same time was Vice-President of Directorate-General 3 (VP3)

7. Legal restrictions for former board members

K. Formal aspects of decisions of EPO departments

1. Composition of the competent departments of first instance

1.1. General comments on changes in composition of the competent departments of first instance

1.2. Examining division

1.3. Opposition division

1.3.1 Enlargement of the opposition division by addition of a legal member

1.3.2 Change in composition of opposition division during opposition proceedings

1.3.3 Composition of opposition division includes those who have taken part in proceedings for grant contrary to Art. 19(2) EPC

1.3.4 Remittal after breach of Article 19(2) EPC

2. Date of decision

2.1. Entry into force of decisions

2.2. Completion of the internal decision-making process

2.3. Date European patent takes effect and jurisdiction after pendency

3. Form of decisions

3.1. When is there a decision?

3.1.1 Cases involving two decisions

3.1.2 Inconsistency between oral and written decisions

3.2. Pointing out the right to appeal in accordance with Rule 111(2) EPC

3.3. Signatures on a decision under Rule 113 EPC

3.3.1 Decisions to be signed

3.3.2 Examples of invalid signatures

a) When decision is announced in oral proceedings

b) Director's signature in place of examiner's signature

3.3.3 Examples of valid signatures

a) Computer-generated communications

b) Death of examiner between oral proceedings and written decision

c) Decision in written proceedings

d) Illegible signature

e) Draft decisions

3.4. Reasons for the decision

3.4.1 Purpose of the duty to provide reasons

3.4.2 Right to be heard – right to have submissions taken into consideration

3.4.3 The requirement of sufficient reasoning

3.4.4 Deficient reasons

a) Deficient reasons sufficient for the purposes of Rule 111(2) EPC?

b) Deficient reasoning insufficient for the purposes of Rule 111(2) EPC

c) No reasons for decision

3.4.5 Special cases

a) References to communications

b) Reference to a board decision or case law

c) Assessment of inventive step without assessing the prior art

d) Identical decision after remittal for further prosecution

e) Dealing with issues that go beyond the decision itself

3.5. Decisions according to the state of the file

3.5.1 Request for decision "according to the state of the file"

3.5.2 No absolute right to a decision issued by way of EPO Form 2061

3.5.3 No waiver of right to a reasoned decision

3.5.4 Reasons for a decision by way of EPO Form 2061

a) Requirements

b) Reference to more than one communication

3.5.5 Documents included in the "state of the file"

4. Loss of rights within the meaning of Rule 112(1) EPC

4.1. Purpose of notification of loss of rights under Rule 112(1) EPC

4.2. Form of notification of loss of rights under Rule 112(1) EPC

4.3. Request for a decision under Rule 112(2) EPC subsequent to a communication

4.4. Responsibility for issuing decisions under Rule 112(2) EPC

4.5. Right to a decision under Rule 112(2) EPC

5. Notification of decision under Rule 111(1) EPC

L. Correction of errors in decisions

1. Competence to correct a decision according to Rule 140 EPC

1.1. Competence of opposition division or examining division

1.2. Competence of the boards of appeal

1.2.1 Legal Board or Technical Boards

1.3. Competence to correct if application is no longer pending

2. Scope of Rule 140 EPC

2.1. Correction of the text of a patent

3. Obvious mistakes according to Rule 140 EPC

4. Legal effect of corrections according to Rule 140 EPC

4.1. Correction requests as opposed to appeals

5. Correction of printing errors in the publication of the patent specification

6. Procedural status of third parties

M. Inspection of files, European Patent Register and stay of proceedings

1. Inspection of files

1.1. General

1.2. Exclusion from inspection under Rule 144 EPC

2. European Patent Register

2.1. General

2.2. Registration of licences

2.3. Transfer

3. Stay of proceedings under Rule 14(1) EPC

3.1. ‍‍Rule 14(1) EPC

3.1.1 General

3.1.2 Opening of proceedings before a national court

3.2. ‍‍Rule 14(3) EPC

N. Observations by third parties

1. Introduction

2. Formal requirements

2.1. Language of the documents

2.2. When can third-party observations be filed?

2.3. Pending proceedings

2.4. Anonymously filed observations

2.5. Reasons for observations

3. Third party's legal status

3.1. General issues

3.2. Third party's procedural rights

4. Third-party observations in opposition-appeal proceedings

4.1. Third-party observations and the scope of opposition

4.2. Introducing a fresh ground for opposition in opposition proceedings

4.3. Introducing a fresh ground for opposition in appeal proceedings

4.4. Third-party observations presented after expiry of the opposition period

4.4.1 General

4.4.2 Third-party observations admitted

4.4.3 Third-party observations not admitted

5. Remittal following filing of observations

O. Transfer of party status

1. Party status as patent proprietor

2. Party status as opponent

2.1. General principles

2.2. Universal succession

2.3. Transfer together with the business assets to which the opposition relates

2.4. No transfer: sale of opponent's subsidiary company

2.5. Legal uncertainty as to who is the correct party

2.6. Evidence for and effect of a transfer

2.6.1 Date of effective transfer

2.6.2 What kind of evidence suffices

2.6.3 Natural heir

2.7. Effect of finding that no transfer took place during opposition proceedings

2.8. No administrative fee for a transfer of opponent status

1.3. National infringement proceedings

1.4. Proceedings pending before the EPO

1.4.1 Intervention in opposition proceedings

1.4.2 Intervention in appeal proceedings

1.5. Time limit for intervention

1.6. Fees

1.7. Substantiation requirement

2. Legal status of intervener

2.1. In opposition proceedings

2.2. In appeal proceedings

2.3. Intervention in proceedings where time limits are pending

Q. Continuation of the opposition proceedings by the EPO

1. Surrender and lapse of the patent

1.1. Surrender of patent

1.2. Continuation of the opposition proceedings after lapse or surrender (Rule 84(1) EPC)

1.2.1 Request for continuation of the proceedings made by the opponent

1.2.2 Request for continuation of the proceedings made by the patent proprietor

2. Death or legal incapacity of an opponent

3. Withdrawal of opposition

3.1. Form and effect of withdrawal on party status

3.2. Effect of withdrawal on opposition proceedings before the departments of first instance

3.3. Effect of withdrawal on opposition appeal proceedings

R. Apportionment of costs

1. Principle that each party must bear its own costs

2. Equity of a different apportionment of costs – case groups

2.1. Late submission of documents and/or requests

2.1.1 Late submission was unjustified

a) Different apportionment of costs ordered

b) No different apportionment of costs ordered – no disadvantage

2.1.2 Late submission was justified

a) No different apportionment of costs ordered

b) Different apportionment of costs ordered for reasons of equity

2.2. Acts or omissions prejudicing the timely and efficient conduct of oral proceedings

2.2.1 Failure of a party to appear at oral proceedings

a) Different apportionment of costs ordered

b) Refusal of a request for apportionment of costs

2.2.2 Request for scheduling or postponement of oral proceedings; withdrawal of request for oral proceedings

2.2.3 Other cases concerning oral proceedings

2.3. Filing of opposition or appeal

2.4. Withdrawal of opposition or appeal at short notice

2.5. Other cases

3. Expenses that may be apportioned

3.1. Future costs

3.2. Procedure for fixing costs

3.3. Appeal against decision fixing amount of costs

4. Procedural aspects

4.1. Filing a request for apportionment of costs

4.2. Competence issues

4.3. Appeal solely against the decision on apportionment of costs inadmissible

S. Notifications

1. Forms of notification

1.1. Notification by postal services

1.2. Notification by means of electronic communication

1.3. Notification by delivery by hand and delivery by public notice

2. Notification to representatives

3. Notification to third parties

4. Spheres of risk and apportioning the burden of proof

T. Applications by non-entitled persons

U. Rules relating to Fees

1. General

2. Payment of fees

2.1. Methods of payment

2.2. Debit orders

2.3. Indication of purpose of payment

3. Date of payment

3.1. Fiction of fee payment in due time – ten-day fail-safe arrangement

4. Insufficient payments – small amounts lacking

5. Reduction of the examination fee

6. Partial refund of the examination fee

V. Representation

1. Overview

2. Professional representatives

2.1. List of professional representatives (Article 134(1) EPC)

2.2. Duty of persons without residence nor place of business within a contracting state to be represented by a professional representative

2.3. Professional representatives during the transitional period

2.4. Procedural steps performed by a person other than the professional representative

2.5. Submissions by a professional representative after transfer of opponent status

3. Legal practitioners entitled to act as professional representative

3.1. General issues

3.2. Register of legal practitioners

3.3. Qualifying conditions according to Article 134(8) EPC

4. Authorisations for appointment of a representative

4.1. Filing of the authorisation

4.2. General authorisations

4.3. Sub-authorisations

4.4. Authorisation of an association of representatives

4.5. Termination of authorisation

5. Oral submissions by an accompanying person

5.1. Enlarged Board's landmark decision G 4/95

5.2. Application of the case law established by the Enlarged Board

5.2.1 Introduction

5.2.2 Trainee patent attorneys

5.2.3 Distinction between party to proceedings and accompanying person

5.2.4 Inventor as accompanying person

5.2.5 Name, qualifications and subject-matter to be specified

5.2.6 Oral submissions to be requested sufficiently in advance

5.2.7 Exceptional circumstances

5.2.8 Professional representative's responsibility

5.2.9 Procedural objection under R. 106 EPC

5.3. Oral submissions by former members of the boards of appeal

5.4. Oral submissions by qualified patent lawyers of non-EPC contracting states

W. Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office

1. Guidelines not binding on boards

2. Guidelines binding (in principle) on departments of first instance

3. The boards' application of the Guidelines in specific cases

IV. Proceedings before the departments of first instance

A. Preliminary and formalities examination

1. Introduction

2. Responsibility for formalities examination

3. Where and how applications may be filed

4. Persons entitled to file application

5. Accordance of a date of filing

5.1. Requirements for according a date of filing

5.2. Identity of applicant

5.2.1 Requirement for information identifying the applicant (Rule 40(1)(b) EPC)

5.2.2 Correction of designation of applicant (Rule 139 EPC)

5.3. Legal effect of accordance of a date of filing

5.4. Subsequent filing of missing parts of the description or missing drawings (Rule 56 EPC)

5.4.1 Legal provisions

5.4.2 Interpretation of Rule 56 EPC

5.4.3 Whether to apply R. 56 EPC or R. 139 EPC

5.5. Corrections under Rule 139 EPC

5.5.1 Legal provisions

5.5.2 No replacement of invention

5.5.3 Extent of competence of the Receiving Section for corrections under Rule 139 EPC

5.6. Change of date of filing

6. Examination of formal requirements

6.1. Requirements of a European patent application (Article 78 EPC)

6.2. Designation of the inventor

6.3. Any other requirement laid down in the Implementing Regulations

6.3.1 General provisions governing the presentation of application documents (Rule 49 EPC)

7. Designation of states

7.1. Legal provisions

7.2. Effect of non-payment of the designation fee

7.2.1 Deemed withdrawal

7.2.2 Designation of states in divisional applications

7.2.3 No correction of non-payment of fee under R. 88 EPC 1973

7.3. Correction of designation of states (Rule 139 EPC)

7.3.1 Decisions considering the application of the EPC 1973

7.3.2 Decisions considering the application of the EPC 2000

8. Priority

8.1. Filing of priority documents

8.2. Correction of priority declarations

8.2.1 Introduction

8.2.2 Correction of priority declarations under R. 88 EPC 1973

a) Requirement for mistake to have been made

b) Time limit for request for correction

8.2.3 ‍‍Rule 52(3) EPC

9. Deemed withdrawal of the application (Rule 100(3) EPC)

10. Publication of the application

B. Examination procedure

1. Stage before substantive examination

1.1. Amendments made by the applicant of his own volition under Rule 137(2) EPC

1.2. Request for examination (Rule 70 EPC)

1.2.1 General issues

1.2.2 The invitation to confirm early request for examination (R. 70(2) EPC)

2. The first stage of substantive examination

2.1. Beginning of "substantive examination"

2.2. One invention to be the subject of examination

2.3. Consolidation of proceedings

2.4. Communications under Rule 71(1) and (2) EPC

2.4.1 Invitation to correct deficiencies and to propose amendments (Rule 71(1) EPC)

2.4.2 Content of Rule 71(2) EPC communication

2.5. Refusal after a single communication

2.5.1 General issues

2.5.2 Failing to make a "bona fide" response

2.6. Amendments under Rule 137(3) EPC

2.6.1 Discretion of the examining division under Rule 137(3) EPC

2.6.2 Consent under Rule 137(3) EPC in oral proceedings

2.6.3 The burden of proposing amendments

2.6.4 Reasons for the exercise of discretion

2.6.5 Second communication under Rule 71(3) EPC: the consent of the examining division

2.7. Failure to reply to the communication from the examining division (Article 94(4) EPC)

2.7.1 Reply within the meaning of Article 94(4) EPC

2.7.2 Waiver of the applicant's right to present comments

2.8. Issue of a further communication under Article 113(1) EPC

2.8.1 Introduction

2.8.2 Arguments taken into account in the decision of the examining division

2.8.3 Information on non-compliance: the essential reasoning

2.8.4 Essential reasoning based on an International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER)

2.8.5 Fresh argument based on grounds and evidence communicated beforehand

2.8.6 Bona fide attempt by the applicant to overcome the objections

2.8.7 Form of the communication under Article 113(1) EPC

2.9. Informal communications

2.9.1 Telephone conversations

2.9.2 Interviews

3. The grant stage in examination

3.1. ‍‍Rule 71(3) EPC communication: the text for approval

3.2. Approval of the text by the applicant

3.2.1 General issues

3.2.2 Clear and unambiguous approval of the text

3.2.3 Decisions with no text submitted or agreed by the applicant (Article 113(2) EPC)

a) General issues

b) Auxiliary request issues

3.2.4 Examination procedure under the previous system (Rule 71 EPC and Rule 51(4) EPC 1973)

3.3. Amendments or corrections filed in response to the communication under Rule 71(3) EPC

3.3.1 Amendments where Rule 71(3) EPC communication is the first communication

3.3.2 Amendments and corrections requested according to Rule 71(6) EPC

3.3.3 Criteria for admitting amendments filed in reply to the Rule 71(3) EPC communication

3.3.4 Claims fees due in response to Rule 71(3) EPC communication

3.4. Amendment after approval of the text for grant

3.5. Examination after remittal for further prosecution

3.6. Amendments after the decision to grant

3.7. Withdrawal of amendments and abandonment of subject matter

3.7.1 General issues

3.7.2 Effects of non-payment of claims fees

3.8. Withdrawal of the patent application

3.8.1 General issues

3.8.2 Correction of the withdrawal of the application under Rule 139 EPC

3.9. Refusal of a European patent application under Article 97(2) EPC (former Article 97(1) EPC 1973)

3.10. Entry into force of a decision to grant a European patent

3.11. Errors in the Patent Bulletin

4. Additional searches during examination

4.1. ‍‍Rule 63 EPC governing incomplete search

4.1.1 Introduction

4.1.2 Additional search necessary: limited discretion of the examining division

4.1.3 Declaration under Rule 63(2) EPC

a) Notoriously well-known technical features

b) Subject‑matter not having technical character

c) Statement indicating the subject-matter to be searched not sufficient to overcome the deficiency noted under Rule 63(1) EPC

4.2. Non-payment of further search fees under Rule 64 EPC

5. Amendments relating to unsearched subject-matter – Rule 137(5) EPC

5.1. General issues

5.2. The purpose of Rule 137(5) EPC

5.3. Applicability of Rule 137(5) EPC

5.3.1 General issues

5.3.2 Extent of the European search report

5.3.3 Subject-matter of amendment not combining with the originally claimed invention

5.4. Criteria for consent to amendments under R. 137(5) EPC

5.4.1 Amendment not affecting the notion of unity of invention

5.4.2 Amendments filed to meet an objection

5.5. Non-compliance with Rule 137(5) EPC: a ground for refusing an application

C. Opposition procedure

1. Legal character of opposition proceedings and applicable principles

2. Filing and admissibility requirements

2.1. Entitlement to file an opposition

2.1.1 General

2.1.2 Examination at any stage in the proceedings of entitlement to oppose

2.1.3 Filing of opposition by patent proprietor or inventor

2.1.4 Filing of opposition on behalf of a third party – straw man

2.1.5 Repeated filing of an opposition by the same person

2.1.6 Filing of multiple oppositions by different persons

2.1.7 Filing a joint opposition – multiple opponents

a) Payment of a single opposition fee

b) Representation, legal status and composition of a multiple opponent

2.2. Formal requirements for opposition and filing in due time

2.2.1 Introduction

2.2.2 Opposition period

2.2.3 Payment of opposition fee

2.2.4 Identity of opponent and correction of opponent's name

2.2.5 Title of invention

2.2.6 Statement of extent of opposition

2.2.7 Statement of grounds for opposition

2.2.8 Indication of facts, evidence and arguments – substantiation of grounds for opposition

a) Principles

b) Sufficient substantiation of grounds for opposition

c) Insufficient substantiation of grounds for opposition

d) Alleged public prior use

e) Non-patent literature or oral disclosure

2.2.9 Other requirements for notice of opposition

2.3. Procedural aspects of examination of admissibility

2.3.1 Formalities officers' powers in opposition proceedings

2.3.2 Admissibility of opposition to be checked at every stage

2.3.3 Rejection of opposition as inadmissible

3. Substantive examination of opposition

3.1. Introduction

3.2. Extent of opposition

3.3. Scope of examination of grounds for opposition

3.4. Fresh grounds for opposition

3.4.1 General

3.4.2 Objections of lack of novelty and lack of inventive step

3.4.3 Grounds raised against amended claims

3.4.4 Scope of examination of new grounds for opposition by opposition division

3.4.5 Examination of fresh facts and evidence related to a fresh ground

3.4.6 Opportunity to comment on new grounds for opposition

4. Late submissions

4.1. Discretionary decision

4.2. Sufficient reasoning

4.3. Concept of "in due time"

4.4. Documents cited in the patent specification or search report

4.5. Criteria for exercise of discretion

4.5.1 Different approaches

4.5.2 Review of discretionary decisions by the boards

4.5.3 Prima facie relevance

4.5.4 Submission contrary to fair and expedient procedure

4.5.5 Abuse of proceedings

4.6. Party entitled to rely on earlier decision

4.7. Late submissions of new arguments

4.7.1 New arguments – definition

4.7.2 Late submissions of new arguments in opposition proceedings

5. Amendments in opposition proceedings

5.1. Admissibility of amendments

5.1.1 Principles

5.1.2 Amendments occasioned by national prior rights

5.1.3 Time frame for filing amendments

5.1.4 Amending a non-opposed sub-claim

5.1.5 Filing of new dependent or independent claims

a) Filing new dependent claims (sub-claims)

b) Filing new independent claims

5.1.6 Applicability of Rule 43(2) EPC in opposition proceedings

5.1.7 Applicability of Rule 137(5) EPC in opposition proceedings

5.1.8 Amendments intended to remedy a lack of clarity

5.1.9 Removal of error (in claim) in opposition proceedings – Rule 139 EPC

5.2. Scope of examination of amendments

5.2.1 General

5.2.2 Extent of power to examine amended claims for compliance with Article 84 EPC

5.3. Proprietor's approval of amended text of the patent

6. Right to be heard in opposition proceedings

6.1. Principle of equal treatment

6.2. Invitation to file observations under Article 101(1) EPC

6.3. Invitation to file observations under Rule 82(1) EPC

6.4. EPO communication concerning submissions by the other party – adequate opportunity to reply

6.5. Opportunity to present comments

6.6. Change in composition of opposition division during opposition proceedings

7. Acceleration of opposition proceedings in the case of pending infringement proceedings

8. Decisions of opposition division

8.1. Revocation of a European patent for failure to fulfil formal requirements – by way of decision

8.2. Interlocutory decisions

8.2.1 General

8.2.2 Maintenance of European patent as amended

D. Limitation/revocation

1. Limitation/revocation – Article 105a-105c EPC

2. Requests for revocation during opposition and opposition appeal proceedings

V. Proceedings before the Boards of Appeal

A. Appeal procedure

1. Legal character of appeal procedure

1.1. General

1.2. ‍‍Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA)

1.3. Suspensive effect of the appeal

1.4. Devolutive effect of the appeal

1.5. Accelerated processing before the boards of appeal

2. Filing and admissibility of the appeal

2.1. Transitional provisions

2.2. Appealable decisions

2.2.1 Departments

2.2.2 Decisions

a) Examples of appealable decisions

b) Examples where the communication was not an appealable decision

2.2.3 Interlocutory decisions

2.2.4 Appeals against decisions of the boards of appeal

2.3. Board competent to hear a case

2.3.1 Technical or Legal Board of Appeal

a) General

b) Technical board of appeal competent

c) Legal Board of Appeal competent

2.3.2 Specific cases

a) Interruption of proceedings

b) Request for a search-fee refund

2.4. Entitlement to appeal

2.4.1 Formal aspects under Article 107 EPC

a) Appeal filed by wrong company

b) Appeal filed in name of representative

c) Party consisting of plurality of persons

d) Company in receivership

e) Death of the appellant (opponent)

2.4.2 Party adversely affected (Article 107 EPC)

2.4.3 Procedural status of the parties

a) Parties to appeal proceedings

b) Rights of parties under Article 107 EPC

c) The boards' duty of impartiality in inter partes proceedings

d) Existence of a company

2.5. Form and time limit of appeal

2.5.1 Electronic filing of appeal

2.5.2 Form and content of notice of appeal (Rule 99(1) EPC)

a) ‍‍Rule 99(1)(a) EPC

b) ‍‍Rule 99(1)(b) EPC

c) ‍‍Rule 99(1)(c) EPC

d) ‍‍Rule 99(3) EPC

2.5.3 Appeal filed within the time limit

2.5.4 Payment of appeal fee

2.6. Statement of grounds of appeal

2.6.1 Legal provisions

2.6.2 Form of statement of grounds of appeal

2.6.3 Content of the statement of grounds of appeal

a) General

b) Causal relationship

c) Refusal of the application

d) Statement of the legal or factual reasons

e) Grounds to be analysed vis-à-vis reasons in decision

f) Objection not raised at first instance

g) Duty of board to be impartial

2.6.4 References

a) References to earlier submissions

b) References to other documents

2.6.5 New case raised

a) Appeal based on the same ground for opposition

b) New facts and evidence

c) Amended claims filed

2.6.6 Arguments need not be new or relevant

2.6.7 Exceptional circumstances warranting admissibility of appeal

a) Immediately apparent the contested decision cannot be supported

b) Patent proprietor requests revocation

c) Substantial procedural violation

2.6.8 No partial admissibility of appeal

2.7. Admissibility of appeal to be checked in every phase of appeal proceedings

2.8. Cases where admissibility of appeal need not be considered

2.9. Interlocutory revision

2.9.1 General

2.9.2 The department of first instance's obligation to rectify the decision

3. Substantive examination of the appeal

3.1. Binding effect of requests – no reformatio in peius

3.1.1 Reformatio in peius does not apply separately to each point

3.1.2 Reformatio in peius and devolutive effect of appeal

3.1.3 Cases where reformatio in peius does not apply

3.1.4 Exceptions to reformatio in peius to be construed narrowly

3.1.5 Patentee as sole appellant

3.1.6 Opponent as sole appellant

3.1.7 Revocation of patent

3.1.8 Exceptions to the rule

3.1.9 Reformatio in peius and lack of cross-appeal in the EPC

3.2. Subject-matter under examination

3.2.1 Opposition appeal proceedings

a) Admissibility of opposition

b) The notice of appeal

c) Unopposed subject-matter not reviewed

d) Dependent claims

e) Appeal by patentee against revocation

f) Removal of references in dependent claims

g) Abandonment of subject-matter

h) Fresh ground for opposition on appeal

i) Ground not properly substantiated by the patentee

j) Ground not properly substantiated by the opponent

k) Ambiguities in the claims

3.3. Patentability requirements under examination in ex parte proceedings

3.4. Facts under examination – applying Article 114 EPC in appeal proceedings

3.4.1 Boards to examine facts of own motion

3.4.2 Circumstances where the board need not examine facts of its own motion

3.5. Review of first-instance discretionary decisions

3.5.1 Principles applying to the review of first-instance discretionary decisions

a) General

b) Proper exercise of discretion

c) Review of first-instance discretionary decisions taken on substantive grounds

3.5.2 Development of the case law on reviewing first-instance discretionary decisions

a) Early case law on exercising discretion

b) Recent case law on exercise of discretion under Art. 12(4) RPBA 2007

3.5.3 The boards' own discretion

a) Submissions refused at first instance admitted on appeal

b) Submissions not admitted by the boards

c) Discretion misused by the department of first instance

3.5.4 Submissions admitted at first instance are part of the appeal proceedings

3.5.5 Review of an opposition division's discretionary decision (not) to admit a new ground for opposition

3.5.6 Review of discretion – stay of proceedings

4. New submissions on appeal

4.1. Introduction

4.1.1 Legal basis

4.1.2 ‍‍Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA)

4.2. Principles applying to late submissions

4.2.1 Inter partes proceedings

4.2.2 Ex parte proceedings

4.3. The boards' discretion

4.4. State of proceedings

4.4.1 General

4.4.2 Procedural economy

a) Late-filed requests

b) Late-filed facts and evidence

4.5. Amendments after arrangement of the oral proceedings

4.5.1 Late-filed requests

a) Filing of requests after arrangement of the oral proceedings

b) Filing of requests during the oral proceedings

4.5.2 Late-filed documents and evidence

4.5.3 Absence from the oral proceedings

a) Absence of applicant (patent proprietor) from oral proceedings

b) Absence of opponent from oral proceedings

4.5.4 New submissions after the end of oral proceedings

4.6. Parties' right to submit observations on amendments – Article 13(2) RPBA 2007

4.7. Communication of a board of appeal

4.8. Circumstances extraneous to proceedings

4.8.1 Introduction

4.8.2 Change of representative

4.8.3 Illness of representative

4.8.4 Change of ownership

4.8.5 Business reasons

4.9. New submissions in proceedings resumed before the boards

4.10. Late submission of new arguments and lines of attack

4.10.1 New arguments on appeal

4.10.2 New arguments and lines of attack admitted

4.10.3 New arguments and lines of attack not admitted

4.10.4 Reinforcement of arguments

4.11. ‍‍Article 12(4) RPBA 2007

4.11.1 General principles

4.11.2 Relationship between Article 12(4) and Article 13 RPBA 2007

4.11.3 Inter partes appeal procedure

a) Not filing documents and evidence at first instance

b) Documents and evidence not admitted by the opposition division

c) Documents and evidence admitted under Art. 12(4) RPBA 2007

d) Requests not submitted by proprietor in opposition proceedings

e) Broadening of claims considered by the opposition division

f) Resubmission of requests withdrawn at opposition stage

g) Request admitted as a normal procedural development

4.11.4 Ex parte appeal procedure

a) Admission of requests already refused by the examining division

b) Requests not submitted in examination proceedings

c) Resubmission of requests withdrawn during examination

d) Feature re-introduced on appeal

e) Interlocutory revision

4.12. Criteria for consideration of amended claims

4.12.1 Principles applicable to amended claims

4.12.2 Clear allowability of amended claims

a) General

b) Examples

4.12.3 Response to objections

4.12.4 Converging or diverging versions of claims

4.12.5 Unsubstantiated requests

4.12.6 Discretion to admit amended claims at any stage of the appeal proceedings

4.12.7 Last chance

4.12.8 Change of subject-matter

4.12.9 Need for additional search

a) General

b) Features taken from the description – Art. 13(3) RPBA 2007

c) Carrying out an additional search

4.12.10 Dependent claims

4.12.11 Number of auxiliary requests

4.12.12 Amended claims not admitted with divisional applications pending

4.12.13 Reinstating broader claims in appeal proceedings

4.12.14 Patent revocation

4.13. Criteria for considering late-filed facts and evidence

4.13.1 Legitimate reaction to the first-instance decision

a) General

b) Late-filed submissions admitted

c) Evidence of common general knowledge

4.13.2 Relevance

4.13.3 Complexity of new subject‑matter

4.13.4 Cases of abuse of procedure

a) No abuse of procedure

b) Abuse of procedure (yes)

4.13.5 Late submission of experimental data

a) Test reports admitted into the proceedings

b) Test reports not admitted into the proceedings

4.13.6 Public prior use

a) No consideration of late-filed evidence of public prior use

b) Consideration of late-filed evidence of public prior use

4.13.7 Admission of submissions relating to Article 55(1)(a) EPC

5. Parallel proceedings

6. Termination of appeal proceedings

6.1. Closure of the substantive debate

6.1.1 Decision taken as the file stands

6.1.2 Proceedings after delivery of the decision

6.2. Interlocutory decisions of a board

6.3. Withdrawal of the appeal

6.3.1 ‍‍Article 114(1) EPC and withdrawal of the appeal

6.3.2 Board's duty to issue decision when appeal is withdrawn after the decision is announced

6.3.3 Board's powers to decide on issues after withdrawal of the appeal

6.3.4 Partial withdrawal of appeal by sole appellant and opponent

6.3.5 No withdrawal of appeal with retrospective effect

6.3.6 Request for withdrawal of appeal to be unambiguous

6.3.7 Conditional withdrawal of appeal

6.3.8 Correction of withdrawal of appeal under Rule 139 EPC

6.4. Deemed withdrawal of patent application

7. Remittal to the department of first instance

7.1. General

7.2. Exercise of discretion to remit

7.2.1 No absolute right to have issue decided on at two instances

7.2.2 TRIPS

7.2.3 Criteria applied when exercising discretion

7.3. Procedural economy

7.3.1 Delay in procedure

7.3.2 Final decision after patent expiry

7.3.3 Obiter dicta

7.3.4 Requests for remittal

7.3.5 Commercial uncertainty

7.3.6 Presentation of new points of view

7.4. Non-examined patentability issues

7.5. Remittal where new submissions filed on appeal

7.5.1 Admission of new submissions alters legal and factual framework

7.5.2 Opposition appeal proceedings

7.5.3 Ex parte appeal proceedings

7.5.4 Patent at risk

7.5.5 Remittal to department of first instance ordered

7.5.6 No remittal to department of first instance

7.6. Remittal following substantial amendments to claims

7.7. Remittal following fundamental deficiencies

7.7.1 Legal basis

7.7.2 Fundamental deficiencies

a) Violation of right to be heard

b) Reasons for decision deficient

c) Violations of Article 19(2) EPC (composition of the opposition division)

d) Appellant adversely affected

e) Content of requests unclear

f) Failure to hold oral proceedings

g) Witnesses not heard

7.7.3 Special reasons not to remit under Article 11 RPBA 2007

a) Special reason identified – no remittal to department of first instance

b) No special reasons – remittal to department of first instance

7.8. Remittal for adaptation of the description

8. Binding effect of decision remitting case to department of first instance

8.1. Notion of res judicata

8.2. Department of first instance bound by decision of board of appeal

8.3. Binding effect in opposition proceedings after remittal to an opposition division

8.4. Board of appeal bound in subsequent appeal proceedings following remittal

8.5. Remittal for the continuation of proceedings

8.6. Remittal only for adaptation of the description

8.7. Remittal to a differently composed department of first instance

9. Reimbursement of appeal fees

9.1. Introduction

9.2. Examination ex officio

9.3. Appeal deemed not to have been filed or inadmissible appeal

9.3.1 Appeal deemed not to have been filed due to late payment of the appeal fee

9.3.2 Notice of appeal not filed in due time but appeal fee paid within 2 month period

9.3.3 Appeal inadmissible

9.3.4 Inadmissible or deemed not to be filed – diverging case law and G 1/18

9.3.5 Translation of notice of appeal

9.3.6 No legal ground for payment

9.3.7 Reimbursement of the appeal fee in case of a request for re-establishment

9.3.8 No legal basis for retaining appeal fee in case of intervention in opposition appeal proceedings

9.3.9 Several appellants

9.4. Allowability of the appeal

9.5. Substantial procedural violation

9.5.1 Violation must be of a procedural nature

9.5.2 Violation must be substantial and affect the entire proceedings

9.5.3 Procedural violation must be committed by the department whose decision is under appeal

9.5.4 Search

9.5.5 Guidelines

9.5.6 Request for interview

9.5.7 Oral proceedings

a) Failure to summon for oral proceedings

b) Submissions of parties as response to summons

c) No reasons for refusal of request for postponement

d) No reasons for refusal of request to change location for oral proceedings

e) Repeated postponements of oral proceedings

f) Minutes

9.5.8 Right to be heard

9.5.9 Inadequate reasons given in the decision at first instance

9.5.10 Error of judgment by a department of first instance

a) Communications

b) Wrong assessment of prior art or technical content

c) Error in the application of the law

d) Board reaches a different conclusion than the department of first instance

e) Exercising of discretion

f) Wrong procedure adopted

g) Following earlier decisions

9.5.11 Cases concerning the decision-making process and the decision

a) Issuing of decision

b) Content of decision

c) Requests

d) Amendments

e) Signature on decision and minutes

f) Composition of opposition division

9.5.12 Partiality

9.5.13 Suspensive effect of appeal

9.5.14 Non-compliance with order of the board

9.5.15 Referral pending before Enlarged Board

9.5.16 Refusal of application on one ground only

9.5.17 Cases concerning documentation and communications passing between the EPO and the parties

a) Ambiguous communication or wrong form

b) No reply to communication under Article 101 EPC

c) Wrong type of communication

d) Period set for opponent to reply to patentee's response

e) Observations not forwarded to other party

f) Appointment of professional representative

g) Warning in relation to a grace period

9.6. Reimbursement of appeal fee in case of interlocutory revision

9.6.1 Requirements

9.6.2 Competence to decide on reimbursement

9.6.3 Examining division should have rectified decision

9.6.4 A rectification decision maintaining earlier decision

9.6.5 Re-opening examination after rectification

9.7. Reimbursement must be equitable

9.7.1 Causal link between substantial procedural violation and filing of appeal

9.7.2 Conduct of appellant

a) Reimbursement held not to be equitable

b) Reimbursement held to be equitable

9.7.3 Violation of the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations

9.8. Withdrawal of appeal

9.8.1 Withdrawal of appeal under Rule 103(1)(b) EPC

9.8.2 Withdrawal of appeal under Rule 103(2) EPC

B. Proceedings before the Enlarged Board of Appeal

1. Introduction

2. Referral under Article 112 EPC

2.1. General

2.2. Composition

2.3. Referral by a board of appeal

2.3.1 General

2.3.2 Discretion of the board

2.3.3 Relevance of the referred question for the underlying case

2.3.4 Question of law

2.3.5 Pending proceedings

2.3.6 Ensuring uniform application of the law

2.3.7 Point of law of fundamental importance

2.4. Referral by the President of the EPO

2.4.1 General

2.4.2 Discretion of the President

2.4.3 Differing decisions

2.4.4 Two boards of appeal

2.5. Procedural issues

2.5.1 Question already decided by the Enlarged Board

2.5.2 Question already pending before the Enlarged Board

2.5.3 Stay of first instance proceedings following a referral

2.5.4 Stay of appeal proceedings following a referral

3. Petition for review under Article 112a EPC

3.1. General

3.2. Transitional provisions

3.3. ‍‍Article 112a(1) EPC – adversely affected party entitled to file a petition for review

3.4. Scope of review by the Enlarged Board of Appeal

3.4.1 ‍‍Article 112a(2) EPC – grounds for a petition for review

3.4.2 Grounds listed exhaustively

3.4.3 No suspensory effect – review of substantive law excluded

3.5. Petitions for review of an interlocutory decision

3.6. Obligation to raise objections

3.6.1 Purpose of Rule 106 EPC

3.6.2 Requirements of a valid objection

a) Recognisable immediately as an objection, defect clear and unambiguous

b) Objection raised in good time by persons capable of validly doing so

c) Different defects must be objected to and considered separately

3.6.3 Examples of invalid objections

3.6.4 Minutes as evidence that the objection was raised

3.6.5 Objection could not have been raised

3.6.6 Compliance with Rule 106 EPC left open

3.7. Contents of the petition for review

3.7.1 Petition must be adequately substantiated

3.7.2 Non-compliance with Rule 107 EPC and failure to remedy a deficiency

3.8. Time limit for filing a petition for review

3.9. ‍‍Article 12(1) RPEBA – late-filed submissions in the review procedure

3.10. ‍‍Rule 109 EPC – composition of the Enlarged Board and review procedure

3.10.1 Composition of the Enlarged Board of Appeal

3.10.2 Involvement of parties other than the petitioner in petition for review proceedings

3.10.3 Group parties

3.10.4 Procedural efficiency

3.11. Factual bases for the review – minutes and grounds for the decision

3.12. Burden of proof

3.13. Effects of a successful petition for review

3.13.1 Decision of board of appeal set aside

3.13.2 Replacement of board members

3.13.3 Reimbursement of the fee for petitions for review

4. Grounds for petition for review

4.1. ‍‍Article 112a(2)(a) EPC – alleged breach of Article 24 EPC

4.2. ‍‍Article 112a(2)(b) EPC – person not appointed as a board member

4.3. ‍‍Article 112a(2)(c) EPC – alleged fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC

4.3.1 General

4.3.2 "Fundamental" violation of Article 113 EPC – causal link and adverse effect

4.3.3 No prior assessment of the merits of a submission

4.3.4 Objective approach – board's intention irrelevant

4.3.5 No obligation to provide detailed reasons for a decision in advance

4.3.6 Boards' obligation to remain neutral

4.3.7 Parties' obligation to participate actively in the appeal proceedings

4.3.8 Reasons for a decision allegedly surprising

a) No opportunity to comment, surprising reasons

b) Grounds not emanating from the board

c) Subjective surprise

d) Reasoning formed part of the proceedings

4.3.9 Timing of a decision allegedly surprising

4.3.10 Consideration of the parties' arguments in the written decision

a) Requirement to have comments considered

b) No obligation to consider each and every argument

4.3.11 Parties' obligation to know the case law, references to decisions

4.3.12 No right to be heard separately on all requests

4.3.13 No right to a further hearing at first instance

4.3.14 No right to a referral under Article 112 EPC

4.3.15 No right to a communication; communication allegedly misleading

4.3.16 Late-filed submissions – boards' discretion under Article 13 RPBA 2007

4.3.17 Alleged violation of Article 113(2) EPC

4.3.18 Further examples of unsuccessful petitions

4.3.19 Successful petitions under Article 112a(2)(c) EPC

4.4. ‍‍Article 112a(2)(d) EPC – any other fundamental procedural defect

4.4.1 ‍‍Rule 104(a) EPC – failure to arrange requested oral proceedings

4.4.2 ‍‍Rule 104(b) EPC – failure to decide on a party's request

4.4.3 Successful petition under Rule 104(b) EPC

4.5. ‍‍Article 112a(2)(e) EPC – criminal act having an impact on a decision

5. Removal from office of a board member

5.1. General

5.2. Composition

5.3. Removal and judicial independence

5.4. Independence from disciplinary proceedings

5.5. Adversarial judicial proceedings

5.6. Publication of the decision

5.7. Reimbursement of costs

C. Proceedings before the Disciplinary Board of Appeal

1. Introduction

2. European qualifying examination

2.1. Formalities and conditions for enrolment

2.1.1 Required qualification or equivalent knowledge

2.1.2 Professional experience

2.2. Examination conditions

2.3. Marking the answer papers

2.4. Grades / passing the examination

2.5. Substantiation of EQE decisions

2.6. Appeals against decisions of the Examination Board and the Examination Secretariat

2.6.1 Competence of the board of appeal

2.6.2 Procedural aspects

a) Time limit for appeal / rectification of decisions

b) Payment of the appeal fee – method of payment

c) Oral proceedings

2.6.3 Objective review of the marks awarded

2.6.4 Review of the marking of the EQE pre-examination

2.6.5 Legitimate interest

2.6.6 Complaints about the conduct of the examination – duties of the Examination Board

3. Disciplinary matters

3.1. Disciplinary measures

3.2. Appealability of decisions in disciplinary matters

4. Code of Professional Conduct

4.1. General professional obligations

4.2. Professional secrecy

4.3. Advertising

5. Appeals against decisions of the Disciplinary Board of Appeal

VI. The EPO acting as a PCT Authority – Euro-PCT applications

1. Introduction

2. Jurisdiction of the boards of appeal

3. Competence of the EPO acting as designated or elected Office

4. Language of the proceedings

VII. Institutional matters

1. Legal status of the EPO boards of appeal

1.1. The judiciary of the European Patent Organisation

1.2. Boards of appeal as judicial authorities

1.2.1 Courts of law under the EPC

1.2.2 Tribunals under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights

1.2.3 Judicial or quasi-judicial authorities under the TRIPS Agreement

1.2.4 Courts according to national case law

1.3. Not a court or tribunal of an EU Member State

1.4. Power to amend the RPBA under Article 23(4) EPC

1.5. Nature of the case law of the boards of appeal – no binding precedents

1.6. Nature of national case law – not binding on the boards of appeal

2. Extension agreements and ordinances

2.1. Legal nature

2.2. No jurisdiction of the boards of appeal

2.3. Non-applicability of Article 105(1)(a) EPC

3. Administrative agreements under Article 10(2)(a) EPC

Table of cases

Decisions of the Disciplinary Board of Appeal

Decisions and opinions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal on referrals

Decisions of the Legal Board of Appeal

Decisions of the Enlarged Board of Appeal on petitions for review

Decisions of the Technical Boards of Appeal

PCT Protests

Index of cited provisions

1. European Patent Convention

2. Implementing Regulations to the EPC

3. Rules relating to Fees

4. Patent Cooperation Treaty (articles and rules)

5. Regulation on the European qualifying examination for professional representatives

6. Regulation on discipline for professional representatives

7. Rules of Procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal

8. Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal

Annexes

1. Rules of Procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal

2. Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA 2007)

3. Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal – in force as from 1 January 2020

4. Transitional provisions

5. Cross-reference list EPC 1973 – EPC 2000

6. General Index

T 2825/19 View decision

Assessment of technicality of programs for computers: "further technical considerations" in the sense of opinion G 3/08

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

You are viewing the 9th edition (2019) of this publication; for the 10th edition (2022) see here

2.1. Introduction

2.2. Discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods

2.3. Aesthetic creations

2.4. Computer-implemented inventions

2.5. Schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business

2.6. Presentations of information

New decisions

T 2825/19

Patent knowledge

Applying for a patent

Law & practice

News & events

Learning

About us

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

Patent knowledge

Applying for a patent

Law & practice

News & events

Learning

About us

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

T 2825/19 × View decision

2. Non-inventions under Article 52(2) and (3) EPC

T 2825/19 View decision