1. Article 123(2) EPC – added subject-matter
  1. Home
  2. Legal texts
  3. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
  4. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office
  5. II. Patent application and amendments
  6. E. Amendments
  7. 1. Article 123(2) EPC
  8. 1.8. Generalisations
  9. 1.8.2 Generalisation and claim category
Print
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

1.8. Generalisations

Overview

1.8.2 Generalisation and claim category

In T 784/89 (OJ 1992, 438) the patent application as filed explicitly disclosed a computer-controlled method for producing a particular effect. By reference to another patent application an apparatus was implicitly disclosed comprising a programmable component which, when suitably programmed, was used for the claimed method. The board considered that only this specific combination had been disclosed. To claim an apparatus for carrying out that method was considered an inadmissible extension of the application because the claim covered apparatus which could also be used in other methods and to achieve other effects. The only allowable claim was for an apparatus for carrying out a method comprising a programmable component which could be suitably programmed to carry out the method.

Previous
Next
Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility