Case Law Clarity

25 June 2026

Appeal against grant to restore pendency before the EPO Board of Appeal

In T 0700/25, the Board considered whether an appeal by the patent proprietor against a decision to grant could be used to restore the pending status of a European patent application in order to file a divisional application. The decision is relevant for applicants who discover, after grant, that a divisional application should have been filed earlier, or who seek to rely on the suspensive effect of appeal proceedings.

19 June 2026

Improved technical effects and post-published evidence in T 0655/24

In T 0655/24, Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04 of 20 January 2026 considered when post-published evidence may be used to support an improved technical effect for inventive step. The decision is relevant because the Board expressly addressed the application of G 2/21 where the application as filed discloses a technical effect, but the proprietor relies on a later-demonstrated improvement of that effect.

11 June 2026

T 873/24 and the reach of G 1/24 claim interpretation in added-matter analysis (Board of Appeal 3.3.05)

In T 873/24 (Board of Appeal 3.3.05, oral proceedings 3 February 2026), the Board indicated that it would 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, by implication, Article 76(1) EPC). The matter is procedurally significant because disputes about “what the claim means” frequently sit at the heart of added-matter objections.

5 June 2026

Düsseldorf Local Division adopts The Hague’s four-step test for infringement by equivalence and applies a structured “feature-by-feature function” analysis

In its decision in Wonderland v Cybex (UPC_CFI_807/2024 and UPC_CFI_334/2025, Local Division Düsseldorf, 27 May 2026), the Düsseldorf panel addressed — in detail — the assessment of patent infringement by equivalent means under Art. 69 EPC and the Protocol.

Case Law Clarity

Appeal against grant to restore pendency before the EPO Board of Appeal

Improved technical effects and post-published evidence in T 0655/24

T 873/24 and the reach of G 1/24 claim interpretation in added-matter analysis (Board of Appeal 3.3.05)

Düsseldorf Local Division adopts The Hague’s four-step test for infringement by equivalence and applies a structured “feature-by-feature function” analysis

Newsletters

Archive