4. Determining the content of the relevant prior art
4.8. Broad claims
|
You are viewing the 9th edition (2019) of this publication; for the 10th edition (2022) see here |
In T 607/93 the board decided that when novelty and inventive step were being assessed, there was no reason to use the description to interpret an excessively broad claim more narrowly, if it was a question not of understanding concepts that required explanation but rather of examining an excessively broad request in relation to the state of the art.