JURISDICTION REPORT: EPO
WHEN IS A DISCLAIMER ALLOWABLE IN A EUROPEAN PATENT APPLICATION?
Marianne Holme Holme Patent A/S
Te provision of Art 123(2) and (3) of the European Patent Convention (EPC) is to avoid that an applicant or proprietor improves the scope of the application or patent by way of amendments.
Various decisions of the European Patent Office (EPO) technical boards of appeal deal with this topic and have resulted in several referrals to the Enlarged Board of Appeal. A recent decision G2/10 of August 30, 2011 adds further case law and guidelines of how to comply with Art 123(2) and (3) EPC when amending the application during the substantive examination and the granted patent during opposition proceedings.
According to landmark decision G1/93 from the Enlarged Board of Appeal, a granted European patent, that contains subject matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed and which subject matter also limits the scope of protection conferred by the patent, cannot be maintained in opposition proceedings unamended.
G1/93 provides generic guidance of how to make such amendments. In particular, G1/93 clarifies that if a limiting feature provides a technical contribution to the claims, the granted patent cannot be amended just by deleting the limiting features from the granted claims without violating Art 123(2) and (3) EPC. It is, however, allowable to replace the added subject matter with corresponding subject matter having proper basis in the application as filed.
If the added subject matter does not limit the scope of the claim it can be removed. If a limiting feature, which has not been disclosed in the application as filed, does not provide a technical contribution to the claimed invention and merely limits the protection conferred by the patent as granted by excluding protection for part of the subject matter of the claimed invention as covered by the application as filed, it can however remain in the granted claim. If any of this is impossible the patent is likely to be revoked.
Whereas G1/93 deals with the addition of undisclosed features, G1/03, G2/03 and G2/10 deal with various allowable and non-allowable approaches to use disclaimers in view of Art 123(2) and (3) EPC.
G1/03 and G2/03 found that a disclaimer could be allowable if it restores novelty by delimiting a claim against a prior right; if it restores novelty by delimiting a claim against an accidental anticipation that is unrelated and remote from the claimed invention; or if it serves to disclaim subject matter which is excluded by the EPC from patentability for non-technical reasons.
In G2/10 the referring technical board of appeal held that a disclaimer introduced to render the main claim novel over the prior art was not disclosed as such in the application as filed and that the criteria differ from those of earlier decisions G 1/03 and G 2/03.
www.worldipreview.com
“DISCLAIMING SUBJECT MATTER DISCLOSED IN THE APPLICATION AS FILED IS ALLOWABLE IF THE DISCLOSURE TEST AFFIRMS SO.”
In the application under appeal the prior art belonged to the same technical field and the examining division found that it was not so unrelated to and removed from the claimed invention that the person skilled in the art would never have taken it into consideration when making the invention. Moreover, the inventor and applicant were the same, and also the content of the application and the prior art were to a large extent identical.
Te purpose of the referral was then to clarify diverging views and solutions and resulted in the general question below:
“Does a disclaimer infringe Article 123(2) EPC if its subject-matter was disclosed as an embodiment of the invention in the application as filed?”
In the present application the excluded subject matter was already in the application as filed and the Enlarged Board of Appeal found G1/03 not to be applicable.
Te referral was answered as follows:
“1a. An amendment to a claim by the introduction of a disclaimer disclaiming from it subject-matter disclosed in the application as filed infringes Article 123(2) EPC if the subject-matter remaining in the claim aſter the introduction of the disclaimer is not, be it explicitly or implicitly, directly and unambiguously disclosed to the skilled person using common general knowledge, in the application as filed.
lb. Determining whether or not that is the case requires a technical assessment of the overall technical circumstances of the individual case under consideration, taking into account the nature and extent of the disclosure in the application as filed, the nature and extent of the disclaimed subject-matter and its relationship with the subject-matter remaining in the claim aſter the amendment.”
In conclusion, disclaiming subject matter disclosed in the application as filed is allowable if the disclosure test affirms so.
In the past the EPO has used a very strict practice not to allow the applicant to disclaim disclosed subject matter. In view of G2/10 we expect the EPO to allow these kinds of disclaimers in the future.
Marianne Holme is a European patent attorney and partner at Holme Patent A/S. She can be contacted at:
mh@holmepatent.dk
World Intellectual Property Review November/December 2011 71
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100