The limitation could result in the claims becoming different in different contracting states if the requester wishes to restrict the claims with respect to one or more, but not all, contracting states in order to avoid conflict with national prior rights. Such different sets of claims can be allowed, provided that the substantive requirements are met for all sets for which the requester is seeking an amendment.
It follows from Rule 138 that a prerequisite for the introduction of different claims for different contracting states during the limitation procedure is that requesters inform the EPO of the existence of the national prior rights when filing the different sets of claims. If they file different sets of claims without informing the EPO of the national prior rights, then the request is to be refused under Art. 105b(3) and Rule 138.[Rule 138; ]
For applications filed on or after 13.12.2007, different sets of claims can no longer be justified on the basis of prior art under Art. 54(3) (for transitional provisions, however, see D‑VII, 8).[Art. 54(3); ]
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/guidelines/e/d_x_10_1.htm
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
8 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.EPC Articles
EPC Implementing Rules
EPO Guidelines - D Opposition and Limitation/Revocation Procedures
XGL D X 10.2 Limitation is different for different contracting states because the claims as granted were different for different contracting states