The EPO has a reputation of being stricter than other patent offices when assessing added subject-matter according to Article 123(2) EPC. But is this really the case?
In this webinar, the added subject-matter approach of the EPO will be compared to other jurisdictions like the US
for specific topics such as intermediate generalisations and claim broadening by omitting features. Based on case law examples, the following questions will be discussed:
- - What are the differences in examining added subject-matter between the EPO and other patent offices?
- - What are the reasons for these differences / What is the legal background?
- - Is the EPO actually more restrictive than other offices in examining added subject-matter?
Jens Horstmannshoff, trained engineer (Dipl.-Ing. in 1996), obtained a Ph.D. in Telecommunications from Aachen University (RWTH), Germany, in 2001.
After working as a concept engineer for wireless baseband telecommunication chips at Infineon Technologies, he joined the European Patent Office in 2002.
He also passed the European qualifying examination (EQE) in 2008 and is currently working as a patent examiner in the field of audio / video / media at the EPO in Munich.
He gained substantial experience as trainer, in particular for distance learning programmes implemented by the European Patent Academy.