T 3181/19 - Farewell to Rule 49(7)

Key points

• The Examining Division refused the application for lack of line numbers under Rule 49(7) EPC.
• The Board confirms that Rule 49(7) EPC is not a ground for refusal, if only because the rule itself says (in English): "The lines of each sheet of the description and of the claims shall preferably be numbered in sets of five" 
• Moreover, the EPO itself explains that with  PatXML no line numbers can be added and that line numbers are not actually required (link)
• "Rule 49 states that lines should "preferably" be numbered. In other words, it is not mandatory. As we move away from paper-based systems, line (and page) numbers become redundant/meaningless. That is why we introduced paragraph numbering some years ago. Data can be viewed sequentially on a computer screen and, however it is reformatted, the paragraph numbers remain the same. This would not be the case with page and line numbering."
• The website about PatXML was last updated on 26.01.2011
• For some reason, PatXML never took off but I understand that the EPO is trying to finally abolish the paper-based formatting requirements of Rule 49 in the course of 2022.
• The Board does not remit the case, and examines novelty and inventive step, finding the claims at issue to be not patentable. 

EPO T 3181/19

The link to the decision is provided after the jump, as well as (an extract of) the text of the decision.

T 1981/15 - Rule 49(10) EPC and clarity

Key points

• In this examination appeal, the refusal was based on Article 84 and Rule 49(10) EPC, last sentence. That sentence reads: ""Only the technical terms, formulae, signs and symbols generally accepted in the field in question shall be used."
• The Board clarifies the meaning of the provision as follows: "The intention, in the opinion of the Board, is to prohibit the use of terminology (and formulae, signs and symbols) which would be misleading or unfamiliar to the person skilled in the art." 
• The Board then applies this rule to the term at issue.
• " While the term "leading" [in: "leading-end open line 50"; the invention is about a radio-frequency device], taken in isolation, might appear imprecise, the skilled person would, as set out above, understand from the claim that the open end is the distal end, remote from the pad. Labelling this end as the "leading" end does not add any new technical information, but neither can it be seen as misleading or detracting from the clarity of the claim. Hence, within the context of the subject-matter of claim 1, the Board finds that element 50 is described in a manner which is clear and comprehensible, using terms which would be understood by a person skilled in the technical field. The requirements of Article 84 and Rule 49(10) EPC are therefore met.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appeal is admissible.

2. Article 84 and Rule 49(10) EPC

2.1 Claim 1 defines that the internal conductor pad includes a "leading-end open line 50". This term, which was present in the translation of the international application into English pursuant to Article 153(4) EPC, was objected to during the examination procedure under Article 84 and Rule 49(10) EPC for being "not generally accepted in the art" (see e.g. communication of 24 July 2014, point 1.1). As a result, this feature was amended to "slot line" in the version of the claims as refused. Since the term "leading-end open line 50" has been re-instated into claim 1 of the present main request, it is necessary for the Board to consider the objections previously raised against it.

2.2 The last sentence of Rule 49(10) EPC reads as follows:

"Only the technical terms, formulae, signs and symbols generally accepted in the field in question shall be used."

The intention, in the opinion of the Board, is to prohibit the use of terminology (and formulae, signs and symbols) which would be misleading or unfamiliar to the person skilled in the art.

2.3 In the present case, the term in question appears in claim 1 as follows:

"the internal conductor pad (5) includes a leading-end open line (50) having a length of a quarter of a wavelength of a radio-frequency signal used in the radio-frequency device (2)."