Sectors

All sectors

Advanced Materials & Manufacturing

Aesthetic Design

AI and Quantum

Brands

Chemistry

Engineering

Life Sciences

Lifestyle & Wellness

Precision Medicine

Software

Startups

Sustainability

Services

All services

Customs Protection and Enforcement

Design Protection

Online Brand Protection

Patent Attorneys

Trade Mark Lawyers

Locations

All locations

Cambridge

Cotswolds

Dublin

Galway

London

Content type

All content types

article

video

podcast

More
T 56/21 – A missed opportunity for providing legal certainty on adapting the description at the EPO

04.11.2024

T 56/21 – A missed opportunity for providing legal certainty on adapting the description at the EPO

It is typically a requirement at the EPO to amend the description for conformity with the allowable claims before grant of a patent; however, there have been a number of diverging decisions on the matter. The latest decision finds that there is no legal basis for enforcing this requirement, which might suggest that it will no longer be necessary to adapt the description. However, there are other decisions which support the requirement to adapt the description. In view of this, and because the Board of Appeal in this case opted not to involve the highest authority at the EPO in order to clarify the situation, it is unclear as to whether or not the requirement to adapt the description will remain.

More
G 1/23 - Potential changes ahead for what constitutes “state of the art”?

23.08.2024

G 1/23 - Potential changes ahead for what constitutes “state of the art”?

The EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal has now issued its preliminary (and non-binding) opinion on G 1/23. This referral (from the Technical Board of Appeal in T 438/19) seeks to clarify whether a commercially available product, with an undisclosed composition or internal structure, must be analysable and reproducible by the skilled person in order to constitute prior art under Article 54(2) EPC.

Get in touch

Submit

Thank you