Sequence Identity Claims After T 0137/24 The recent Board of Appeal decision in T 0137/24 provides useful guidance on how sequence identity claims are assessed under the EPC, particularly in relation to added matter and sufficiency. Biotech sequence-related claims are...
Summary of T 439/22 This decision represents a further development of the earlier T 439/22 proceedings, which led to the G1/24 referral to the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA). The decision of the EBA was reported in our previous article. To recap, granted claim 1...
Background The Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G 1/23 caused a significant change in practice at the European Patent Office (“EPO”), resulting in a product made publicly available before the priority date which the skilled person could not have reproduced now...
Background Under G 1/92, a product on the market was not considered “available” as prior art under Article 54(2) EPC if the skilled person could not reproduce it without undue burden. This created a peculiar legal fiction: a product could be purchased yet legally...
In a further development, T1849/23 has become the first case where clear claim language is broadened by definitions and/or embodiments provided in the description. Background T 1849/23 concerned an appeal filed by Alois Kober GmbH, the Opponent, against the Opposition...
As a reminder, following grant of a patent to Foreo AB an opposition was filed by Beurer GmbH, and during the pendency of the opposition, Foreo sent a letter to Geske GmbH & Co. KG accusing them of infringment and threatening action. Geske filed an intervention...
Recent Comments