The EPO User Day 2025 is scheduled for September 23-24, 2025. This year, the EPO will offer dedicated sessions for SMEs and micro-entities, focusing on how patents can support growth and innovation. The event also offers breakout sessions for patent professionals.
Referreal on adaptation of description
As reported by the European Patent Office (EPO), questions relating to the adaptation of the description were referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (G 1/25).
It is the EPO’s practice that the description must be aligned with amended claims. I.e., when claims are amended, the description should be adapted accordingly to reflect these changes, avoid contradictions, and maintain a coherent disclosure.
At least one Board of Appeal has previously voiced doubts as to whether there is a legal basis for this practice, as previously reported in this blog section.
Considering recent case law from the Enlarged Board (G 1/24, point 20), it would be surprising if the Enlarged Board took the position that the EPO’s practice on adaptation of the description had no legal basis. The adaptation of the description also appears to be dear to many in EPO management, who seem to regard consistency of description and claims to be a KPI for the ongoing patent quality discussion.
EPO Case Law Book (11th ed.)
The EPO has published the 11th edition of the Case Law of the Boards of Appeal. The case law book (which is available in digital format only) is a great resource on the plethora of decisions rendered by the Boards of Appeal in both ex partes and inter partes proceedings.
G 1/24 – claim interpretation
On 18 June 2025, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) rendered its decision on claim interpretation in EPO proceedings in matter G 1/24 . The EBA held that (headnote of the decision): “The description and any drawings are always referred to when interpreting the claims, and not just in the case of unclarity or ambiguity.” Thus, claim interpretation in proceedings before the EPO is based on the same principles as in infringement proceedings. Prior to G 1/24, some Boards of Appeal took the position that the description and drawings are to be consulted for claim interpretation only in case the claims were unclear or ambiguous.
Many useful and valuable resources on G 1/24 are already available online, such as:
- The EPO’s Press Communiqué of 18 June 2025
- The IPKat’s review of the decision
- The Kluwer Patent Blog’s review of the decision
While the headnote of G 1/24 stipulates that the description is to be taken into consideration for claim interpretation in proceedings before the EPO, this does not mean that clarity issues in the claims can be resolved by simply referring to the description. Point 20 of G 1/24 highlights “… the importance of the examining division carrying out a high quality examination of whether a claim fulfils the clarity requirements of Article 84 EPC. The correct response to any unclarity in a claim is amendment.”
Appeal proceedings with intervener
In proceedings before the EPO, the question of whether appeal proceedings may be continued, after withdrawal of the sole appeal, with a party who intervened at the appeal stage has been settled for a long time. The Enlarged Board of Appeals (EBA) held in decision G 3/04: “After withdrawal of the sole appeal, the proceedings may not be continued with a third party who intervened during the appeal proceedings.”
In T 1286/23, the Board brings this question before the Enlarged Board of Appeals again. As stated in r. 3.7 of the decision, “[the] referring Board is … not in agreement that Article 105 EPC in combination with Article 107 EPC must be read in the sense that also a third party intervening only at the appeal stage can never become more than a non-appealing opponent.” The referring Board provides detailed reasons for this position in r. 3.7 et seq. of the decision.
Thus, the procedural question pertaining to a party who intervened at the appeal stage is going to be revisited.
Search and Examination Matters 2025
The European Patent Office’s (EPO) Search and Examination Matters 2025 event is scheduled to take place on Feb 18-21, 2025. The Search and Examination matters event serves as a platform for patent professionals and other IP stakeholders looking to gain deeper insights into the intricacies of the EPO’s search and examination processes and practices.
EPO seminars
As the year draws to a close, the EPO is going to host several interesting seminars, including:
Opposition Matters 2024: According to the EPO, “Opposition Matters is the EPO’s key event for professional users to keep abreast of the latest and most relevant developments in opposition proceedings.”
Litigation Matters 2024: According to the EPO, “Litigation Matters … is devoted to the latest practices of patent litigation in Europe, with particular attention to the UPC litigation.”
Registration is already open. These events represent a great opportunity to catch up with recent developments. Both events are free of charge and organized by the EPO Academy.
Adaptation of the description in EPO proceedings
It is rare for a Board of Appeal decision to spark widespread interest on (business and/or IP-related) social media. This was different last week, when many patent practitioners enthusiastically posted about T 0056/21 of 04 October 2024.
The headnote of this decision reads:
“In examination of a patent application, neither Article 84 nor Rules 42, 43 and 48 EPC provide a legal basis for requiring that the description be adapted to match allowable claims of more limited subject-matter.”
Some have suggested that T 0056/21 will significantly change the EPO’s practice when it comes to adaptation of the description. This will remain to be seen.
Roche’s IP department and the counsel handling T 0056/21 deserve praise for seeking clarification on this issue. This even more so, as the adaptation of the description appears to be very dear to some examiners in light of the quality discussions. And Board 3.3.04 is to be applauded for reasons of the decision that are not only comprehensive, but are guided by what the drafters of the EPC had in mind when it comes to clarity.
Not everyone reading the various posts on T 0056/21 might be aware of the fact that the same applicant (Roche) has previously pushed this matter to the Board of Appeal. The previous appeal has resulted in T 1989/18 of 16 December 2021. While the latter decision does not have a headnote, the reasoning in points 4-13 of T 1989/18 reaches conclusions similar to those in the headnote of T 0056/21. T 1989/18 did not appear to do much to alter the EPO’s practice as regards the adaptation of the description. Hopefully, Roche (or other applicants) will continuetheir commitment to resolving the question of whether, and if so to what degree, an adaptation of the description to amended claims is required. At least in US proceedings, all IP stakeholders appear to be comfortable working with a description that is not modified in light of claim amendments during prosecution.
Search at the EPO
In the September 12, 2024 episode of the EPO’s Talk Innovation podcast, the focus is on patent quality. One highlight is a new step being taken by the European Patent Office (EPO) to improve the thoroughness of search reports. Starting in November 2023, these reports will be shared with members of the upcoming Examining Division and their team manager. This change aims to make sure that the search reports are as comprehensive as possible. The goal is to minimize situations where important prior art is only introduced years into a case, even when the patent claims haven’t changed much.
The episode also discusses other efforts to improve consistency in procedures. For example, the EPO is working to help Examiners better compare their practices regarding the number of communications sent out before a case goes to oral proceedings. These measures are set to enhance the overall quality and efficiency of the patent examination process.
EPO Boards of Appeal decision abstracts
The EPO has started to publish abstracts of decisions of the Boards of Appeal on a monthly basis. The abstracts are accessible via the EPO’s appeal decisions webiste. This is a great resource for those who want to receive updates on recent case law, edited by the Legal Research Service of the Boards of Appeal, on a regular basis.