Background European patent no. EP 2 991 507 B1 was granted with claims directed to a mixture containing fish oil and fruit juice for use in the treatment of cancer. At opposition, the patent was found to lack novelty and the amendments proposed by the patent...
Background Due to methods of treatment of the human or animal body being excluded from patentability in Europe, applicants are required to claim substances or compositions for use in a method of treatment instead. Thus, there is a need for the term “substances or...
Priority Historically, the EPO have assessed formal entitlement to priority quite strictly. In scenarios where a priority application is filed by joint applicants, all of them, or their respective successors in title, must be named on the subsequent priority claiming...
When the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal issued its decision in G 2/21 (the “plausibility” referral), many were left wondering what the requirements were for a patent applicant/proprietor to be able to rely on post-filed evidence in support of inventive step. However,...
Our Headnote It seems that the era of “plausibility” is over, and there may now be little, if any, consideration given to whether the technical effect was plausible / not implausible in view of the application as filed. Instead, emphasis is now placed on the “broadest...
Recent Comments