Incompatent
Schreiber
Can anyone help me with this commonly misunderstood problem?
When amending the claims of a european application I am not allowed to add matter under A123(2).
Does this mean that I cannot broaden claim 1 by removing a feature from claim 1? The test according to the case law G2/98 is to apply the novelty and disclosure test. If I applied the novelty test to the amended claim 1 it would be a valid amendment as the claim was completely disclosed in the original description. The missing feature was however contained in the essential part of the original claim and in the description the sentence "The problem is solved through the features of claim 1" is used.
What is the Case Law/EPC provision which says that I cannot broaden the claim? Or is this amendment possible?
Thanks! you can reply in German!
When amending the claims of a european application I am not allowed to add matter under A123(2).
Does this mean that I cannot broaden claim 1 by removing a feature from claim 1? The test according to the case law G2/98 is to apply the novelty and disclosure test. If I applied the novelty test to the amended claim 1 it would be a valid amendment as the claim was completely disclosed in the original description. The missing feature was however contained in the essential part of the original claim and in the description the sentence "The problem is solved through the features of claim 1" is used.
What is the Case Law/EPC provision which says that I cannot broaden the claim? Or is this amendment possible?
Thanks! you can reply in German!
