On deciding where to start within the closest prior art – T 209/25
EPO case law, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO T decisions Michał Dąbrówka EPO case law, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO T decisions Michał Dąbrówka

On deciding where to start within the closest prior art – T 209/25

This article discusses Board of Appeal decision T 209/25, which addresses how to select the correct starting point within the closest prior art when assessing inventive step at the EPO. The decision confirms that an embodiment directly and unambiguously disclosed in the prior art may serve as a viable starting point even if it is non-exemplified, less preferred, and disclosed only via a single selection.

Read More
Webinar on EPO practice: G 2/21 and Inventive Step – Reliance on a Purported Technical Effect
EPO case law, EPO G decisions, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO practice, EPO prosecution, EPO T decisions Michał Dąbrówka EPO case law, EPO G decisions, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO practice, EPO prosecution, EPO T decisions Michał Dąbrówka

Webinar on EPO practice: G 2/21 and Inventive Step – Reliance on a Purported Technical Effect

In this on-demand webinar, we review selected decisions applying G 2/21 and share key takeaways for those working with European patent portfolios, particularly in the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors.

Read More
There’s an alternative, and then there’s an ‘alternative’ - T 1468/23
EPO case law, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO T decisions, EPO practice Michał Dąbrówka EPO case law, EPO oppositions and appeals, EPO T decisions, EPO practice Michał Dąbrówka

There’s an alternative, and then there’s an ‘alternative’ - T 1468/23

In T 1468/23, the EPO’s Board of Appeal overturned the reasoning of the Opposition Division on inventive step after reassessing the comparison between the claimed invention and the closest prior art.  Read more in the latest blog post.

Read More