Adam Lacy

 G 1/24 has now been issued, and concludes “The description and any drawings are always referred to when interpreting the claims, and not just in the case of unclarity or ambiguity.” With this simple…

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…

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…

One critical factor in developing generative AI is access to a large amount of well-structured data. As such, the EPO is sitting on a goldmine when it comes to AI tools for patent law. I was…

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…

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…

  Following months of speculation, EPO Board of Appeal 3.2.01 yesterday issued decision T 439/22 referring questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal on the extent to which the description and…

Following up on Thorsten’s blog post yesterday, I report on the second day of the Oxviews 9th Intellectual Property and Competition Forum, which took place in the Justizpalast in Munich on 19 June…

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…