Our managing partners Dr. Dorothea Hofer and Jürgen Feldmeier have been named IAM Global Leaders 2026!
We are delighted to receive this special award and would like to thank everyone involved.
Handelsblatt and Best Lawyers have honored “Germany’s Best Law Firms 2025” and we are very pleased to have been mentioned here again. This award is based on client feedback and colleague votes, so we would like to express our sincere thanks to all our colleagues and clients who recommended us in such large numbers.
Click here for the article.
On June 18, 2025, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office published its decision in G1/24 (“Heated Aerosol”) – a decision with significant implications for the future interpretation of European patent claims. The guiding principle is clear: claims must always be interpreted in the light of the description and drawings – not only if the wording is unclear (para. 18.).
The EPO is thus fundamentally changing its previous practice and moving closer to the line taken by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) and German courts. The Enlarged Board of Appeal expressly clarifies that an isolated interpretation of the patent claim based purely on the wording – as was advocated in T 169/20, for example – is neither practicable nor desirable.
Starting point: referral T 439/22 – from individual case to system change
The decision was prompted by a referral from the Technical Board of Appeal 3.2.01 (T 439/22). The issue in dispute was whether a definition of a term in the description – in this case the term “gathered sheet” – influences the interpretation of the claim, even if the claim is clearly formulated in terms of language.
The answer of the Enlarged Board of Appeal is clear: Yes, the description must always be used. The “claims-only” approach previously advocated in some cases is now a thing of the past. The EPO is thus committed to a holistic, context-related interpretation – a step towards greater legal certainty and uniformity in Europe.
What does this mean in practice?
The effects for patent applicants and us patent attorneys are immediately noticeable:
– Consistency between description and claims is more important than ever – inconsistencies can have a direct impact on claim interpretation.
– Examination procedures could also change: EPO examiners are likely to analyze claims more in the context of the description in the future.
– Third parties – e.g. competitors – will have new points of attack if the description contains inconsistencies with the claims.
Consequence:
Amendments to the description during examination must be approached with even more care, as inadequate adjustments can quickly lead to problems with Article 123(2) EPC.
Classification in the European context: Alignment with the UPC and national practice
The UPC already follows the now confirmed approach in decisions such as NanoString v. 10x Genomics: Here too, the context of the description is used to interpret the claim – with the aim of achieving a uniform scope of protection in all member states.
German courts also traditionally rely heavily on the description, but often interpret it in light of the technical purpose. The approach is therefore often more function-oriented than the EPO’s previously more text-oriented approach – which can sometimes result in more far-reaching interpretations.
Conclusion:
G1/24 creates a degree of clarity and harmonization here. The decision strengthens harmonization within Europe and improves the predictability of claim interpretation for all parties involved – a welcome step for European patent practice as a whole.
Handelsblatt and Best Lawyers have honored “Germany’s Best Lawyers 2025” and we are very pleased to have been mentioned here again. This award is based on surveys of commercial lawyers, so we would like to thank all our colleagues who have recommended us so highly.
Click here for the article.
We are pleased to share that our firm Prüfer & Partner together with six of our intellectual property attorneys have been recognized for their outstanding work in patent prosecution and nullity in the newly published 2025 Edition of IAM Patent 1000, one of the world’s leading rankings with regard to patent services providers. We are very proud and honored that our next generation managing partners Dr. Susanne Sonnenhauser and Dr. Christian Gärtner were also listed for the first time.
What the ranking said
Prüfer & Partner
“A reliable firm providing quality patent prosecution advice…appreciated for their responsiveness, cost-effective approach and overall excellent client service.”
Jürgen Feldmeier
“Jürgen Feldmeier is a responsive and highly professional practitioner with a deep understanding of his clients’ technologies. This means he provides careful and accurate opinions, as well as valuable advice on patent applications and portfolio management, and defence strategies that are tailored exactly to his customers’ needs.”
Dr. Dorothea Hofer
“Dorothea Hofer has the ability to understand complex technical matters and provide the appropriate advice. She is a great attorney, capable of dealing with urgent matters through putting together strong teams to tackle important cases.”
Dr. Andreas Oser
“Andreas Oser carefully drafts patent applications and provides helpful advice on handling proceedings at the patent office. He devises cost-efficient strategies, highlighting the risks and challenges of each option, and selecting the most suitable path depending on his clients’ needs.”
Markus Adamczyk
“Markus Adamczyk, a dual-qualified patent attorney and attorney-at-law, sees issues from every angle to dispense valuable holistic counsel. He works seamlessly with his clients to masterfully protect and enforce their rights.”
Dr. Susanne Sonnenhauser
“Susanne Sonnenhauser is adept at working with groundbreaking technologies and companies whose patents are central to their success; unflappable under pressure, she operates with precision and the utmost care at each turn.”
Dr. Christian Gärtner
“Christian Gärtner is an impressive strategist who devotes his practice to achieving meaningful patent protection for his clients. He gets to know their businesses incredibly well and tailors his advice to suit their needs.”
About IAM Patent 1000
The prestigious ranking IAM Patent 1000, published by Globe Business Media Group in London, is commonly regarded as the definitive ‘go-to’ resource for those seeking to identify world-class, private practice patent expertise as well as leading patent service providers. IAM undertook an exhaustive qualitative research project to identify outstanding firms and individuals across multiple jurisdictions. When identifying the leading firms, factors such as depth of knowledge, market presence, and the level of work on which they are typically instructed were all taken into account, as well as positive peer and client feedback.
Good news for Prüfer & Partner!
We have been listed in the Chambers & Partners ranking! We are grateful to have received this award in recognition of excellence in IP law, as it demonstrates our commitment and the quality of our work and reflects the strong trust our clients place in us.
The Chambers & Partners ranking is recognized worldwide as it is based exclusively on independent research and feedback from clients and peers.
This success is therefore not only a credit to the passion of all of our firm’s employees, but also a testament to the solid relationships with our clients and partners who have been instrumental in helping us getting here.
We would therefore like to thank our clients for their positive feedback and our employees for their passion and tireless efforts. This recognition motivates us to constantly strive for the best service and to meet the needs of our clients with the highest level of commitment.
We are therefore optimistic about the future, even though we are currently experiencing uncertain times and the development of the global economy resembles a rollercoaster ride. We are ready for the challenges ahead!
We are delighted to have been ranked again this year as “Leading Firm 2025” in Germany in the categories “Patent Prosecution” and “Patent Litigation” by LEGAL 500. Thanks to a strong team, we were able to win this special award.
A special thank you goes out to our clients and colleagues for the great recommendations of our firm:
‘In my eyes, the professional expertise with all the technical support is fantastically positioned and gives me a very good, consistent feeling of information.’
‘The overall level of their service is excellent. Their response is always very quick and appropriate and their ability to understand and analyze legal and technical issues is sufficiently high.’
‘The team is highly qualified and very agile. The interaction with colleagues is also very pleasant on a human level. Communication is fluid and very transparent, both in terms of cost structure and with regard to practical feasibility and the next steps. We are very satisfied with the cooperation with our colleagues.’
The ranking can be seen here.
Standard essential patents, or SEPs for short, are essential for the implementation of certain technology standards in products such as smartphones and vehicles. SEP holders are obliged to grant licenses on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (so-called “FRAND”) terms. It is therefore not surprising that for years there have been frequent legal disputes regarding the licensing obligation and, in particular, the conditions, i.e. the amount of the license fees. As a result, a middle ground has been sought for years to find an amicable and satisfying solution for both sides, i.e. licensor and licensee.
As early as 2022, there was a proposal to form so-called LNGs, Licensing Negotiating Groups, which can be seen as a kind of cooperative purchasing group for licenses from SEPs, in order to make license negotiations more efficient by reducing the number of necessary negotiations and thus lowering transaction costs.
After the European Commission had in principle endorsed the proposal of these LNGs as a possible approach and issued corresponding guidelines for them, the German Federal Cartel Office (FCO) has now officially accepted the establishment of the ‘Automotive Licensing Negotiation Group’ (ALNG). The ALNG is a cooperation initiative between BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Thyssenkrupp and VW. The aim is to enable the participating companies to jointly negotiate licenses for standard-essential patents (SEP) required for the implementation of technologies such as 4G or 5G in vehicles.
The FCO came to this conclusion after examining the proposal in accordance with §§ 1, 2 GWB in conjunction with § 32c(2) GWB and Article 101 TFEU. Andreas Mundt, the President of the FCO, emphasized that the cooperation is breaking new ground in terms of antitrust law and that the toleration of the ALNG is subject to the following conditions (see FCO press release dated June 10, 2024):
The establishment of licensing negotiation groups (LNGs) such as the ALNG is a relatively new development in the market. While the ALNG emphasizes the advantages of such cooperation, licensors express concerns that such groups could shift bargaining power to their disadvantage. However, the FCO has decided that the ALNG in its planned form does not raise any serious competition concerns as long as the established framework conditions are adhered to.
So far, the ALNG appears to be the only “buying syndicate” for FRAND licenses. In the future, however, smaller SMEs could also join forces to form such LNGs in order to negotiate more cost-efficiently lower-priced FRAND licenses with SEP holders or SEP pools, not only in the 4G/5G/6G area, but in all areas in which standards have been developed, such as IoT, robotics, coding, etc.
However, it remains to be seen whether further LNGs will be formed, following the example of the ALNG and relying on its toleration by the FCO. Critical voices see the FCO’s market definition as too broad, for example, or see a loss of time and efficiency due to the possibility of (downstream) bilateral negotiations between individual ALNG members and SEP holders.
We are delighted to have been ranked again this year as “Leading Firm 2024” in Germany as well as in Europe, Middle East & Africa (EMEA) in the categories “Patent Prosecution” and “Patent Litigation” by LEGAL 500. Thanks to a strong team, we were able to win these special awards.
A special thank you goes out to our clients and colleagues for the great recommendations of our firm:
‘The Prufer team works hand in hand both internally and externally with colleagues in an exemplary manner. They perfectly pass the ball to each other.’
‘Internally, cross-disciplinary questions are discussed quickly and easily and feedback is given. Questions are recorded and answered, regardless of who you ask and whether the contact is an expert or not.’
‘The advice is given on what is best for the client and not on what the client wants to hear.’
‘The overall level of service is excellent. Response is always very quick and appropriate and the ability to understand and analyse legal and technical issues is sufficiently high.’
The ranking can be seen here.
The European Patent Office will increase most of its fees by an average of around 5% as of 1 April 2024. The fee increase will be significantly higher for the 3rd and 4th renewal fees, which will rise by almost 30%.
Renewal fees can be paid to the EPO at the earliest 3 months before the due date. To save money, it would therefore be advisable to pay renewal fees due by 30 June 2024 before 1 April 2024.
You can find the EPO’s complete fee table here.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact us at office@pruefer.eu.
