RBFF

General

Rule 42 Epc : 答复欧洲专利申请时常见的几种问题及其答复方式

Di: Amelia

For the requirements of Art. 83 and of Rule 42 (1) (c) and Rule 42 (1) (e) to be fully satisfied, it is necessary that the invention is described not only in terms of its structure but also in terms of its function, unless the functions of the various parts are immediately apparent. Indeed, in some technical fields (e.g. computers), a clear description of function may be much more appropriate (1) Rules 42, 43 and 47 to 49 shall apply to documents replacing documents making up the European patent application. Rule 49, paragraph 2, shall also apply to the translation of the claims referred to in Rule 71. (2) The President of the European Patent Office shall determine the presentation requirements of all documents other than those making up the application. (3) INTERPRETATIONS OF RULE 42, PROPULSION

Promo_Epc project rule of credit and progress measurement | PDF

要約 (1)欧州特許条約(EuropeanPatentConvention;以下,EPC)では,2007年12月13日付のEPC2000の発効以降,料金の変更も含めてさらに数度の規則改正がなされました。本稿では,改正された規則についての細かい説明ではなく,現行の条約,規則を考慮し,時間,費用等においていかに効率的な欧州特許出願を行うかと Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC concerns the content of the description and requires that the invention be disclosed in a manner that allows the invention and the advantages thereof to be understood. Rule 48 (1) (c) EPC concerns prohibited subject matter and requires that an application does not contain obviously irrelevant or unnecessary subject matter. The Board of Appeal also considered Rules 42 (1) (c) and 48 (1) (c) EPC. Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC requires that the description discloses the invention in such terms that the technical problem and its solution can be understood.

Regel 42 (1) e) EPÜ → Beschreibung der Ausführungsbeispiele der Erfindung Regel 42 (1) f) EPÜ → Ausführungen zur gewerblichen Anwendbarkeit der Erfindungen

答复欧洲专利申请时常见的几种问题及其答复方式

その中でEPOは、明細書が補正されたクレームと一致しなければならないという通常の慣行を明確に支持しました。 EPOはまた、国内手続におけるクレームの保護範囲の解釈に関するEPC第69条 (1)とも関連すると述べています。

Angaben in der Beschreibung Regel 42 (1) EPÜ des Europäischen Patentübereinkommens (EPÜ) beschreibt, welche Angaben die Beschreibung enthalten muss. According to Rules 42 (1) and (3) EPC, the invention must be of “technical character” to the extent a general requirement for an that it must relate to a technical field (Rule 42 (1) (a) EPC) must concern a technical problem (Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC) and must have technical features in terms of which the matter for which protection is sought can be defined in the claim

  • 知財情報-特許制度基本情報-欧州
  • GL F II 4.6 Rule 42 vs. Art. 52
  • [유럽특허법] Two-part Form
  • 1. Sufficiency of disclosure

However, the board of appeal concluded that Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC cannot be a legal basis for establishing a general requirement for an adaptation of the description to the claims. Rule 48 EPC requires that a European patent application must not contain any statement or other matter obviously irrelevant or unnecessary under the

The Board of Appeal also considered Rules 42 (1) (c) and 48 (1) (c) EPC. Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC requires that the description discloses the invention in such terms that the technical problem and its The requirements relating to the content of the description, claims, drawings and abstract are set out in Articles 83 to 85 and Rules 42, 43, 47 and 48. The followings will be checked by the EPO during the formalities examination*****: （六）Rule 42 (1) (c）EPC 要求申请人在发明内容部分明示其范围与修改后的权利要求的范围一致。 答复建议：建议按照审查员的意见进行修改。

1. Sufficiency of disclosure

However, there is a growing tendency among examiners to amend the description also to acknowledge the prior art cited in the examination procedure in the description (as required by Rule 42 (1) (b) EPC) and to adapt the content of the description to the subject-matter of the claims to be granted (as required by Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC). 基於上述42(1)(b)的規定,於是申請人必須在「發明說明」中引用審查人員所使用的引證文件,但依據上述EPC Rule 42(1)(b)的規定,其中並未詳細規定申請人應如何「引用」審查人員所使用的引證文件,所以實務上申請人往往需面對一些不確定的自由度,因此本文就對此,列舉 The new text of the Convention adopted by the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation by decision of 28 June 2001 (see OJ EPO 2001, Special edition No. 4, p. 55) has become an integral part of the Revision Act of 29 November 2000 under Article 3 (2), second sentence, of that Act.

The claims shall define the matter for which protection is sought. They shall be clear and concise and be supported by the description. A revised version of this publication entered into force, see here

〔特許制度基本情報-欧州(EPC)〕 〔 概要〕 欧州特許条約(EPC: European Patent Convention)は、欧州諸国における特許出願から特許付与までの手続を、欧州特許庁(EPO: European Patent Offic e)で一括して行うことを可能とする条約です。 1. The claims shall define the matter for which protection is sought in terms of the technical features of the invention. Wherever appropriate, claims shall contain: a) a statement indicating the designation of the subject-matter of the invention and those technical features which are necessary for the definition of the claimed subject-matter but which, in combination, form part

PPT - W W W W W HOW (Why, When, Who, Where, What, How) Read a Patent ...

See notice from the EPO of 15.03.2024 concerning amended Rules 1, 41, 147 and 152 EPC (OJ EPO 2024, A34). See decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal G 3/99 (Annex I). of 5 October 1973 as adopted by decision of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation of 7 December 2006 and as last amended by decision of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation of 10 December 2024 Any references to persons made in the EPC Implementing Regulations are to be understood as being gender-neutral.

EuropeanPatentOffice European Patent Office EPO Jobs EPO Procurement EPOorg EPOjobs TheEPO

INTERPRETATIONS OF RULE 42, PROPULSION

It is a requirement of the European Patent Convention (EPC) that a description for a patent application should indicate the background art which, as far as is known to or c of this rule the applicant, can be regarded as useful to understand the invention (Rule 42 (1) (b) EPC). The application should, “preferably, cite the documents reflecting such

  • Granting of a patent: As a applicant you have to consider this now!
  • Computer-Implemented Inventions at the EPO
  • Description amendment saga continues at the EPO
  • Will the EPO Change its Examination Practice?
  • 欧州特許出願においてすべきこと,すべきでないこと

Rule 42 EPC specifies the content of the description of a European patent application and constitutes an implementing rule of Article 83 EPC. Rule 42 (1) (e) EPC (previously the description Rule 27 (1) (e) EPC 1973) notably specifies that “ [the] description shall describe in detail at least one way of carrying out the invention claimed, using

Article 97 (2) EPC clearly states that if a European patent application or the invention to which it relates does not meet the requirements governing the application X R of the Convention (e.g. the requirements of Article 84 EPC and Rule 42 EPC), it is to be refused by the examining division.

GL F II 4.6 Rule 42 (1) (c) vs. Art. 52 (1) If it is decided that an independent claim defines a patentable invention within the meaning of Art. 52 (1), it must be possible to derive a technical problem from the application. In this case the requirement of Rule 42 (1) (c) is fulfilled (see T 26/81). [Rule 42 (1) (c); ] According to Rule 43 (2), as applicable to all European patent applications, the number of independent claims is limited to one independent claim in each category. Exceptions from this rule can only be admitted in the specific circumstances defined in sub-paragraphs (a), (b) or (c) of this rule, provided the requirement of Art. 82 with regard to unity is met (see F‑V). The following are Invalidity objection (subject-matter extends beyond the application as filed, Article 123 (2) EPC)) not addressed in terms of content since no counterclaim for revocation was filed (R. 25 RoP, R. 42 RoP).

For example, the requirements of Rule 42(1)(c) may be waived where the invention is based on a fortuitous discovery, the practical application of which is recognised as being useful, or where the invention breaks entirely new ground. 6 references found. Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page. EPC Implementing Rules X R.42 EPC Content of the description

1. Article 123 (2) EPC – added subject-matter 2. Article 123 (3) EPC – extension of the protection conferred 3. Relationship between Article 123 (2) and Article 123 42 PROPULSION (3) EPC 4. Correction of errors in the description, claims and drawings – Rule 139 EPC 5. Evidence and standard of proof for allowing amendments and corrections

Computer-Implemented Inventions at the EPO

EPC Implementing Rules X Chapter II Provisions governing the application X R.40 EPC Date of filing X R.50 EPC Documents filed subsequently Thus, the BoA came to the conclusion that Article 69 EPC provides no legal basis for requiring claims and adaptation of the description to be in line with the amended claims. Finally, the BoA examined whether Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC and Rule 48 (1) (c) EPC, respectively, may provide legal basis for requiring adaptation of the description.

As per Rule 42 (1) (c) EPC (Rule 27 (1) (d) EPC 1973 and Rule 27 (1) (c) EPC 1973, before and as of 1 June 1991, respectively) the description shall disclose the invention, as claimed, in such terms that the technical problem, even if not expressly stated as such, and its solution can be understood, and state any advantageous effects 第III部 条約第III部施行規則 第I章 欧州特許出願 規則35 規則36 規則37 規則38 規則39 規則40 通則 欧州分割出願 欧州特許出願の発送 出願手数料及び調査手数料 指定手数料 出願日 第II章 出願に関する規定 規則41 規則42 規則43 規則44 規則45

Rule 42 (1) (b) EPC The rule requires the applicant to disclose some contents of the cited relevant documents in the background of the application document.