appeal-Archiv - meier ip

G 2/24 – intervener in appeal proceedings

Florian Meier — Thu, 25 Sep 2025 18:53:03 +0000

As reported by the EPO in a Press Communiqué of 25 September 2025, the Enlarged Board of Appeal has rendered decision G 2/24 (“Skin cleanser”) that relates to the procedural status of an intervener in opposition appeal proceedings.

The Enlarged Board confirmed its previous decision G 3/04 and concluded that, after withdrawal of all appeals, appeal proceedings may not be continued with a third party who intervened only during the appeal proceedings (see the EPO’s Press Communiqué of 25 September 2025).

Der Beitrag G 2/24 – intervener in appeal proceedings erschien zuerst auf meier ip.

Referreal on adaptation of description

Florian Meier — Wed, 30 Jul 2025 09:00:37 +0000

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.

Der Beitrag Referreal on adaptation of description erschien zuerst auf meier ip.

EPO Case Law Book (11th ed.)

Florian Meier — Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:34:38 +0000

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.

Der Beitrag EPO Case Law Book (11th ed.) erschien zuerst auf meier ip.

Appeal proceedings with intervener

Florian Meier — Wed, 18 Jun 2025 13:46:16 +0000

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.

Der Beitrag Appeal proceedings with intervener erschien zuerst auf meier ip.

EPO Boards of Appeal decision abstracts

Florian Meier — Mon, 02 Sep 2024 10:01:15 +0000

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, …

Continue reading "EPO Boards of Appeal decision abstracts"

Der Beitrag EPO Boards of Appeal decision abstracts erschien zuerst auf meier ip.

EPO – strawman’s appeal fee

Florian Meier — Wed, 05 Apr 2023 14:07:15 +0000

A new EPO Boards of Appeal decision T 84/19 deals with an interesting question relating to appeal fees. The decision holds that an opponent who is a natural person or otherwise entitled to benefit from the reduced appeal fee does not have to pay the full appeal fee, even if there is a secret sponsor (akin to the ‘real party in interest’ in post-grant proceedings in other jurisdictions). This holds as long as the opposition does not constitute a circumvention of the law regarding the entitlement to pay a reduced appeal fee.

By way of background for the readers familiar with or otherwise interested in USPTO post-grant proceedings: According to decisions G 3/97, G 4/97, it is not required that the ‘real party in interest’ be named in EPO opposition proceedings. Thus, the situation may (and does) occur in which an opponent as party to the EPO proceedings may be different from the person interested in the revocation or amendment of the patent.

Der Beitrag EPO – strawman’s appeal fee erschien zuerst auf meier ip.