T 0439/22 vom 11.12.2025

Grounds for opposition - lack of patentability (yes)
Interpretation of the claims in light of the description (yes)
Novelty - main request (no)
Amendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (yes)
Amendment after summons - cogent reasons (yes)
Amendments - patent amended in such a way as to extend the protection it confers (yes)

1. In interpreting the language used in a claim, "consulting", "referring to", "using" and "taking into account" the description and figures are synonyms for the act of deriving the necessary information from the patent as a whole to understand which meaning a person skilled in the art would attribute to the terms used in the claim.
(see Reasons 2.3)
2. Claim interpretation is the result of both reading the claims and consulting the description and drawings as a unitary process (holistic approach taken by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decision G 1/24).
(see Reasons 2.4)
3. In line with this approach, a person skilled in the art reading the claim in the context of the description and figures will try to take a definition found in the description at face value. As long as the definition is technically reasonable and complies with the overall teaching of the claims, description and figures, the skilled person will read terms in the claim in the sense of the definition, taking into account both the broadening and limiting aspects.
(see Reasons 3.4 and 6)