In T 0610/24, the Board set aside a refusal for lack of inventive step and remitted the case for further prosecution, including a further search. The decision is notable for its treatment of the “closest prior art” in the problem–solution approach and for clarifying when an incomplete prior art search can justify remittal under Article 11 RPBA 2020.
Continue readingThe EPO Board of Appeal’s decision T 0824/23 addresses the application of intermediate generalisation under the European Patent Convention (EPC). The case clarifies the conditions under which a feature extracted from a specific embodiment of the original disclosure may be introduced into a claim without contravening Article 123(2) EPC. This decision is particularly relevant for practitioners concerned with claim amendments during opposition or appeal proceedings.
Continue readingIn T 873/24 (Board of Appeal 3.3.05, oral proceedings 3 February 2026), the Board announced that it will refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) on whether (and how) the Enlarged Board’s claim-interpretation guidance in G 1/24 extends to the assessment of added subject-matter under Article 123(2) EPC and Article 76(1) EPC.
Continue readingIn T 0439/22 (Technical Board of Appeal 3.2.01, 11 December 2025) the Board applied the Enlarged Board’s guidance in G 1/24 on claim interpretation. The decision is a practical illustration of how an explicit definition in the description can determine the meaning of a seemingly straightforward term used in the claims. As this case shows, this can have decisive consequences for novelty and for late attempts to “repair” the description on appeal.
Continue reading