GL H VI 2.1.1 Admissibility of corrections in opposition and limitation proceedings

The submission by the proprietor of an amended specification containing only the correction of an obvious error will not be admitted in either opposition or limitation proceedings, unless: 
– in opposition proceedings the amendment can be considered to be occasioned by a ground for opposition (Rule 80);
– in limitation proceedings the amendment constitutes a limitation vis-à-vis the claims as granted or amended and complies with Art. 84 and Art. 123 (Rule 95(2)).
In opposition, the request to correct an error under Rule 139 may not be used to correct the granted version of the patent, thereby circumventing the restrictions under Rule 140.
However, if the claims are amended in the course of opposition proceedings, the correction of the claims, even if it aims at the removal of an obvious mistake in the claims as granted, does not constitute a correction under Rule 140.
Therefore, if the proprietor files an amended specification fulfilling the requirements of Rule 80, he can additionally request the correction of an obvious error under Rule 139 (see T 657/11). This request for correction will be dealt with by the opposition division (see H‑VI, 2.1) as described in H‑VI, 2.2 to H‑VI, 2.2.2.
Similarly, if an amended set of claims fulfilling the requirements of Rule 95(2) is filed, obvious errors can be corrected under Rule 139 (see D‑X, 4.3).

14 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

EPO Guidelines - H Amendments and Corrections

General Case Law

own subtype: guidelines