4.3.3 Art. 84

Clarity of the claims and support by the description are only examined to the extent that an amendment introduces non-compliance with Art. 84. Otherwise, the usual standards apply for interpreting the requirements of Art. 84 in limitation proceedings (see F‑IV, 4, F-IV, 5 and F-IV, 6).

In particular, the examining division checks whether the amendments introduce inconsistencies between the description and the claims that cast doubt on the subject-matter for which protection is sought (see F‑IV, 4.3 for examination of inconsistencies between the description and the claims in general). If this is the case, in accordance with Rule 95(2), the proprietor is requested to amend either the description or the claims in order to comply with Art. 84. In this context, it is pointed out that the examining division may not adapt the description of its own motion.

Note that amendments made to the claims or description solely to improve the patent, or cosmetic changes not occasioned by the limited claims, cannot be allowed. In particular, mere clarifications made to the claims, particularly dependent claims, cannot be allowed unless they are occasioned by the limitation(s) introduced elsewhere in the claims (see also D‑X, 4.3.1).

For the admissibility of a request for correction under Rule 139 of the documents making up the patent, see H‑VI, 2.1.1.

The filing of auxiliary requests together with a main request is possible (see H‑III, 3).