Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Optional parameter $type declared before required parameter $nid is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).

CLR II D 3.1.5.B Example cases – features of the invention not all disclosed in the priority document

CLR II D 3.1.5.A Example cases – features of the invention all disclosed in the priority document

CLR II D 3.1.5 Explicit or implicit disclosure of the features of the invention in the priority document

In G 2/98 (OJ 2001, 413) the Enlarged Board stated that priority for a claim, i.e. an "element of the invention" within the meaning of Art. 4H Paris Convention, is to be acknowledged if the subject-matter of the claim is specifically disclosed, be it explicitly or implicitly, in the application documents relating to the disclosure, and priority can be refused if there is no such disclosure.

CLR II D 3.1.4 Reference to common general knowledge

The priority of a previous application in respect of a claim in a European patent application in accordance with Art. 88 EPC is to be acknowledged only if the skilled person can derive the subject-matter of the claim directly and unambiguously, using common general knowledge, from the previous application as a whole (G 2/98, OJ 2001, 413).

CLR II D 3.1.3 Disclosure in the previous application as a whole

CLR II D 3.1.2 ‍‍G 2/98 and the concept of disclosure – interpretation in the same way as for Art. 123(2) EPC

CLR II D 3.1.1 ‍‍G 2/98 – interpretation of "the same invention"

CLR II D 3.1 Disclosure in the previous application of the invention claimed in the subsequent application

3.1.1 ‍‍G 2/98 – interpretation of "the same invention"

3.1.2 ‍‍G 2/98 and the concept of disclosure – interpretation in the same way as for Art. 123(2) EPC

3.1.3 Disclosure in the previous application as a whole

CLR II D 3 Identity of invention

In accordance with Art. 87 EPC a European patent application is only entitled to priority in respect of "the same invention" as was disclosed in the previous application. See also Art. 88(2) to (4) EPC.

CLR II D 2.6 Multiple exercise of the right of priority for one contracting state

According to the board in T 998/99 (OJ 2005, 229), Art. 87(1) EPC 1973 made no provision for multiple filings in the same country within the priority period for the same subject-matter and hence the same invention on the basis of the same priority document. However, in subsequent decisions this strict approach was rejected.