“Poisonous Divisionals” Poisoned In The EPO

by Ladas & Parry LLP
Contact

For the past few years there has been fear that the law on priority claims in the European Patent Office (EPO) could result in a divisional application becoming prior art against its parent if the divisional application described subject matter that was clearly disclosed in an application from which its parent claimed priority, yet the parent itself had claims that were not entitled to such priority. An example might be a PCT application that claimed priority from a US application but contained added subject matter, where after regional phase entry in the EPO, a divisional application was filed.  The divisional focused on the subject matter of the original US application, but the parent contained claims that were generic to both the subject matter of the original US application and the subject matter added in the PCT application.  Such generic claims were only entitled to the date of the PCT application whereas the divisional was entitled to the date of the US application.  As a result, the divisional could be considered as unpublished prior art under Article 54(3) of the European patent Convention.  Such a scenario came to be referred to as the “poisonous divisional” and was played out in Decision T476/09.  However, in other cases, boards of appeal found ways to avoid coming to this conclusion.  The divergent lines of cases made it appropriate for a decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal.  This has now occurred in Decision G1/15 which was released to the public on February 1, 2017 and in effect destroyed, or severely limited, the effects of the “poisonous divisional” theory.

Article 88(2) of the European Patent Convention states:

“multiple priorities may be claimed in respect of a European patent application, notwithstanding the fact that they originated in different countries. Where appropriate, multiple priorities may be claimed for any one claim.”

An earlier decision of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (G2/98) had held that:

“use of a generic term or formula in a claim for which multiple priorities are claimed .. is perfectly acceptable … provided that it gives rise to the claiming of a limited number of clearly defined alternative subject matters.”

As has been the case in a number of other decisions of the Enlarged Board, it was concerned to ensure that applicants should not secure protection for inventions that had not yet been made at the time when the application in question was filed, noting that priority claims could only be made for the “same invention” as that disclosed in the priority application and that:

The requirement for claiming priority of the “same invention,” means that priority of a previous application in respect of a claim in an European patent application  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.

Hence, the decision’s concern that to claim multiple dates for a single claim, the claim must set out clearly defined alternative subject matters.

In its latest decision, the Enlarged Board went back to first principles, noting that under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the legislative intent of a treaty (such as the European Patent Convention) as set out in the documents preparatory to the treaty (the tavaux préparatoires) should prevail over any case law interpreting the treaty.  The Enlarged Board concluded that since the EPC is “a special agreement within the meaning of the Paris Convention,” the legislative intent of the sections of the EPC relating to priority claims had been to give effect to the priority provisions of Article 4 of the Paris Convention and that discussions prior to the adoption of the EPC on the meaning of those provisions of the Paris Convention were therefore a guide as to how the priority provisions of the EPC were to be interpreted.  Based on this foundation, the Enlarged Board stated:

“It can thus be concluded both from the law and from the logic of the underlying concept that the right of priority as established in the EPC (and the Paris Convention) operates to exclude the collision of subject matter disclosed during the priority period with identical subject matter disclosed in a priority document, in so far as priority has been validly claimed.”

This being the case, the requirement of decision G2/98 that a claim could only have multiple priority dates if it claimed a limited number of clearly defined alternative subject matters “cannot be construed as implying a further limitation on the right of priority.”  The proper test to be applied is described as follows:

In assessing whether a subject matter within a generic claim may enjoy partial priority, the first step is to determine the subject matter disclosed in the priority document that is relevant, i.e. relevant in respect of prior art disclosed in the priority interval.  This is done in accordance with the disclosure test laid down in the conclusion on G2/98 and on the basis of explanations put forward by the applicant or patent proprietor to support its claim to priority in order to show what the skilled person would have been able to derive from the priority document.  The next step is to examine whether the subject matter is encompassed by the claim of the application or patent claiming said priority.  If the answer is yes, the claim is de facto divided into two parts, the first corresponding to the invention disclosed directly and unambiguously in the priority document, the second being the remaining part of the subsequent generic… claim not enjoying priority…

In order to be able to ascribe different dates to different parts of a claim therefore, it is sufficient that one can determine what subject matter comprised within the claim is disclosed in the priority document, for which the date of filing of this document is the relevant date and the rest of the claim has the date of filing of the European application (or in the case of a PCT application, the date of filing the PCT application) irrespective of whether the subject matter for which priority is recognized forms any “clearly defined alternative subject matter.”  This being the case, there is no “poisonous divisional” because that part of the subject matter of the parent claim that was disclosed in the priority application will have the same effective date as any divisional directed specifically to subject matter disclosed in the priority document.

[View source.]

Written by:

Ladas & Parry LLP
Contact
more
less

Ladas & Parry LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.