GL F V 3.2.4 Common dependent claims

While an independent claim is always part of the common matter among its dependent claims, the opposite is not true: a claim dependent on several independent claims is never part of the common matter between these independent claims.
For example, an application contains three independent claims, A, B and C, and several claims combining the content of the independent claims, i.e. claims A+B, A+C, B+C and A+B+C.
Independently of the order and the manner in which the claims are presented, the application in question contains three sets of claims:
(1)independent claim A with dependent claims A+B, A+C and A+B+C;
(2)independent claim B with dependent claims A+B, B+C and A+B+C;
(3)independent claim C with dependent claims A+C, B+C and A+B+C.
Unity or lack of unity is assessed firstly between the independent claims A, B and C: if these claims are not linked by a single general inventive concept and they do not contain any same or corresponding special technical features, a lack of unity is present. The content of any of the dependent claims, e.g. of claim A+B+C, has no bearing on this analysis. Dependent claims comprising features of two or more groups of inventions, i.e. dependent claim A+B+C in the above examples, belong to all of the two or more groups of inventions.

2 references found.

Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.

EPO Guidelines - F The European Patent Application