EPO case law: Essentiality test abolished

The essentiality test developed in decision T 331/87 on the question of whether the subject matter of the claim extends beyond the content of the application as originally filed when replacing or deleting a claim feature (which test has also been included into the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO) should no longer be used. … >> read more

28.02.2018

EPO case law: High standards for transfer of a priority right

The burden of proof for legally valid priority succession lies with the applicant/patent holder. Evidence is subject to the BoA’s free evaluation, whereby “beyond reasonable doubt” (and not “balance of probabilities“) is to be applied as a standard of proof, because it can be assumed that the evidence is essentially within the control of the … >> read more

21.02.2018

The right to be heard and the obligation to state reasons

If, for the first time in the contested decision a document is cited which in view of the patent office anticipates the claimed subject without giving the applicant the opportunity to comment on it beforehand, the applicant’s right to be heard is infringed. Rejection due to lack of novelty and inventive step requires verifiable justification. … >> read more

15.02.2018
  • KEYWORDS

  • PERIOD

    • 2019
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2016
    • 2015
    • 2014
    • 2013
    • 2012
    • 2011
    • 2010
    • 2009
    • 2008
    • 2007
    • 2006
    • 2005
    • 2004
    • 2003
    • 2002
    • 2001
    • 2000