Defining antibodies by functional features is not always straightforward at the EPO. T326/22 is a nice example of how this can be achieved.     To briefly recap the standard EPO approach, an antibody may generally be claimed by reference to its epitope, i.e. the structurally defined part of the antigen that it specifically binds to…

Article 9(4) of Directive 2004/48/EC obliges Member States to ensure that courts may issue provisional measures, including injunctions, without giving prior notice to the defendant in certain circumstances. This applies, in particular, when a delay is likely to result in irreparable harm to the rights holder, or when there may be a real risk that…

G 1/24 addresses the extent to which the description can be used to interpret the claims. As previously discussed, it looks set to be one of the most consequential EPO decisions of the decade. The hearing in G 1/24 took place on 28 March, with the opponent advocating a new “diamond standard” that the “description…

In case you missed it, here are the main points from the EPO Boards of Appeal Case Law Conference 2024. As ever, this was a really interesting event with lots of high quality presentations. Above all, it is great to hear at first hand what the Board members themselves think of the hot topics at…

We have long meant to write something about the need, or the lack thereof, for adapting the description to amended claims. The announcement in the second preliminary opinion of Technical Board of Appeal (TBA) 3.3.04 in T 56/21, suggesting a referral of this question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal, combined with the sole appellant’s…

1.       Preamble: The Iron Triangle In project management there is a law known as the Iron Triangle, which states that in delivering any project, there are three points on a metaphorical triangle: time, cost and quality. In other words: how fast can the project be done; how cheaply; and what is the quality of the…

It is well known that the EPO Boards of Appeal take a strict line on admissibility of new elements of the appeal case under Articles 12 and 13 RPBA. But if the request to hold new elements inadmissible is itself filed late, the admissibility of the inadmissibility request may be questioned, see e.g. T 500/16…

Following the issuance of G 2/21 last year, we asked whether the plausibility elephant had left the room. Our Kluwer colleague and friend Miquel Montañá discussed this issue more recently here. Several decisions have meanwhile been issued applying the new “test” in G2/21, the lucidity of which may have reminded readers of the oracle of…

The EPO’s Boards of Appeal are famously strict on added matter. But normally applicants can sleep soundly at night after making amendments based entirely on the original dependent claims having appropriate back references, especially where the amendments still cover the examples. T 1137/21 however might cause some applicants sleepless nights, as the Board found the…