1.14. Amending the description
J 3/21 × View decision
Catchword:
1. Mere inconsistencies among the indications in the request for grant of a European patent (EPO Form 1001), and between some of them and the originally filed application documents, are not sufficient to prove an alleged obvious error or the obviousness of a correction offered under Rule 139 EPC.
2. The ban on corrections under Rule 139 EPC by replacement of at least the complete description is categorical.
1.14.7 Replacement of complete description and drawings
In G 2/95 (OJ 1996, 555) the Enlarged Board observed that a correction affecting the content of the application could only be effected within the limits of Art. 123(2) EPC (as defined in G 3/89, OJ 1993, 117). The complete documents forming a European patent application, that is the description, claims and drawings, could not be replaced by way of a correction under R. 88 EPC 1973 (R. 139 EPC) by other documents which the applicants had intended to file with their request for grant.
In J 16/13 the board held that the ratio decidendi of G 2/95 (and also of J 5/06) was also applicable to all cases where at least a complete description was sought to be exchanged.