The EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal has heard oral arguments on a critical question: whether or not, and to what extent, the claims of a European patent can be interpreted using the description and figures. Settling the disharmony of EPO case law, and harmonizing the EPO and UPC’s approach, will provide important guidance on how to interpret the validity of the patent and the scope of protection provided by the patent. Topics of discussion include:

• Identifying the key cases that led to the divergence in EPO case law with reference to Articles 69 and 84 EPC
  • E.g., the approach used in T 0169/20, T 0223/05, T 1924/20 versus the approach used in T 556/02, T 1473/19, and the ongoing proceedings in T 439/22 (where the Board referred the claim interpretation questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal)
• Identifying the UPC’s approach to claim interpretation at first instance and at the Court of Appeal
  • E.g., the first instance infringement action filed by 10x Genomics against NanoString; NanoString’s subsequent appeal (CoA decision UPC_CoA_335/2023); and NanoString’s parallel EPO opposition proceedings
• Analyzing the submissions of the amicus curiae briefs
• Summarizing the oral arguments in the referral (oral proceedings heard in March 2025)