2 March 2022

T 1131/18 - Clerical errors and Rule 80

Key points

  •  The Board: "The Board considers that the changes in claims 1 and 3 were only typographical or editorial changes that do not result in any amendment of the subject-matter claimed. They have no incidence on the subject-matter claimed and do not introduce any unclarity, as argued by the appellant. Consequently, the main request is admitted into the appeal proceedings (Article 13(2) 2020 and Rule 80 EPC)."
  • The claim amendments at issue were: 
    • Hence, in claim 1 the feature "in a ratio of 2 : 1" was modified by the suppression of the empty spaces to "in a ratio of 2:1".
    • In claim 3, the feature "a butyl methacrylate-2-dimethylaminoethyl)methacrylate-methylmethacrylate copolymer (1:2:1)" was modified by the addition of a bracket (shown in bold and underlined) to "a butyl methacrylate-2-(dimethylaminoethyl)methacrylate-methyl-methacrylate copolymer (1:2:1)" (modification shown in bold and underlined).
  • The present decision seems to provide a new approach to the prohibition of "tidying up" the claims under Rule 80 EPC.
EPO T 1131/18 - 
The link to the decision is provided after the jump, as well as (an extract of) the text of the decision.


3. Admission of the main request into the appeal proceedings

The main request corresponded to auxiliary request 1 maintained by the opposition division with minor modifications in independent claim 1 and in dependent claim 3.

Hence, in claim 1 the feature "in a ratio of 2 : 1" was modified by the suppression of the empty spaces to "in a ratio of 2:1".

In claim 3, the feature "a butyl methacrylate-2-dimethylaminoethyl)methacrylate-methylmethacrylate copolymer (1:2:1)" was modified by the addition of a bracket (shown in bold and underlined) to "a butyl methacrylate-2-(dimethylaminoethyl)methacrylate-methyl-methacrylate copolymer (1:2:1)" (modification shown in bold and underlined).

The Board considers that the changes in claims 1 and 3 were only typographical or editorial changes that do not result in any amendment of the subject-matter claimed. They have no incidence on the subject-matter claimed and do not introduce any unclarity, as argued by the appellant. Consequently, the main request is admitted into the appeal proceedings (Article 13(2) 2020 and Rule 80 EPC).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Do not use hyperlinks in comment text or user name. Comments are welcome, even though they are strictly moderated (no politics). Moderation can take some time.