ARTICLE
18 July 2023

A US And EP Comparison On Added Subject Matter

FH
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP

Contributor

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP is a law firm dedicated to advancing ideas, discoveries, and innovations that drive businesses around the world. From offices in the United States, Europe, and Asia, Finnegan works with leading innovators to protect, advocate, and leverage their most important intellectual property (IP) assets.
Our recent webinar comparing US and EP approaches to added subject matter was well attended and the number of questions we received in the Q&A clearly showed that added subject...
United States Intellectual Property

Our recent webinar comparing US and EP approaches to added subject matter was well attended and the number of questions we received in the Q&A clearly showed that added subject matter at the EPO remains a hot topic for attorneys around the world.

Our top tips for minimizing the likelihood of added matter problems at the EPO are:

1. Build-in basis for combinations at the drafting stage

  • Consider adding multiple claim dependencies and/or multiply dependent numbered embodiments

2. Assume the Examples and Figures are merely illustrative

  • Assume that you will not be able to use the Examples and Figures as basis for amendments during prosecution, and build in any key features into the general description when drafting

3. Take care with amendments during prosecution

  • Added matter is frequently fatal at opposition so take the time to stress test claims of important cases prior to grant – there is no presumption of validity at the EPO

A recording of the webinar and a copy of the slides can be found here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More