1

In Europe, a limitation in a granted patent that is later found not to have been disclosed in the original application leads to the revocation of the respective claim(s) (art. 123 (2) and (3) EPC).

What is the legal consequence of the same situation in the US?

Example:

Claim 1 after changes during examination: A car with 4 wheels.

The description is silent about any wheels, the examiner still grants the patent due to an error (or whatever).

Will the patent die or is there any remedy?

  • 1
    I came here just to say that the Art. 123(2)-123(3) trap does not always result in the revocation of the patent, even when it is the independent claim suffering from such problem. You may be able to limit the offending claim(s) with other (disclosed) features that do not broaden the scope of your claim. – the Europeist Oct 29 '19 at 19:04
0

The patent owner can request a re-examination any time during the life of the patent to narrow claims and, with the AIA, anyone can request an Inter Partes Review to challenge the validity of a patent. That is a relatively expensive process. These are not specific to the grounds of a claim going beyond the disclosure but can be used to remedy/attack claims for many reasons of defect/validity.

| improve this answer | |
  • That's the process, but what's the result? – DonQuiKong Oct 30 '19 at 23:00
  • In he case of an IPR, a board decision which could then be appealed. How the decisions would go is fact dependent of course - maybe I misunderstand your comment. A claim does need to be supported by the specification showing that the inventor had possession of the invention at the time of filing and that it was enabled. – George White Oct 30 '19 at 23:14
  • Maybe my question wasnt clear. Suppose the claim does in fact miss support, is there any remedy for the owner or will it be revoked like at the epa? (For example, in Germany the limitation will simply be ignored when assessing patentability). – DonQuiKong Oct 31 '19 at 16:42
  • If the owner is concerned that a granted claim may not meet some criteria for patentablity the owner can cause a re-examination in which the owner can amend granted claims to narrow them. At the end of the reexamination the claims might be more defensible. Without any formal procedure the owner can also just disclaim particular claims. Are you saying that in the EP deciding that claim goes beyond support in the specification is a black and white issue decided without any adversarial process? – George White Oct 31 '19 at 17:08
  • If one limitation is found to not have support in the application, the whole claim is invalid - does that help answer your question? – George White Oct 31 '19 at 17:34
0

USPTO allows for correction of patents, even after the grant of a patent. The following ways are provided by USPTO in order to correct a granted patent

• The patentee may disclaim one or more claims of his or her patent by filing in the Office a disclaimer as provided by the statute (35 U.S.C. 253).

• When the patent is defective in certain respects, the law provides that the patentee may apply for a reissue patent.

• Any person may file a request for reexamination of a patent, along with the required fee.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.