EPO Guidelines 2025: What's Changing?

The EPO has released previews of the updated Guidelines for Examination that will come into force on April 1, 2025. Here at Solve Intelligence, we've analyzed the changes to understand their impact on European Patent Practice. Here are just some of the notable proposed changes.

EPO Guidelines 2025: What's Changing?

Use of AI Tools

Firstly, in the General Part of the Guidelines (point 5), a section regarding the use of AI tools has been added:

‘The parties and their representatives are responsible for the content of their patent applications and submissions to the EPO and for complying with the requirements of the EPC regardless of whether a document has been prepared with the assistance of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool.’

The notion that the attorney retains responsibility for their work, regardless of whether they used an AI tool in the process, reflects the recent epi guidelines 3a and 3b in the ‘Use of Generative AI in the Work of Patent Attorneys’. 

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

The Guidelines in G-II-3.3.1 refer to Artificial intelligence and Machine Learning. Following their expansion last year, these guidelines have been further refined in 2025. Firstly, the definition of algorithms has been generalised via removal of specific references to particular techniques like "classification, clustering, regression and dimensionality reduction."

Secondly, further guidance has been added regarding the patentability of AI and ML based inventions. The new guidelines note that: 

‘if a claim of an invention related to artificial intelligence or machine learning is directed either to a method involving the use of technical means (e.g. a computer) or to a device, its subject-matter has technical character as a whole and is thus not excluded from patentability under Art. 52(2) or (3). In such cases, the computational models and algorithms themselves contribute to the technical character of the invention if they contribute to a technical solution to a technical problem, for example by being applied in a field of technology and/or by being adapted to a specific technical implementation.’

This additional contextual information reflects the tried and tested approach to patentability and inventive step that we have seen for many years with respect to computer-implemented inventions. Case law is still light in this area, but decisions like T1669/21 will illustrate more clearly how the EPO intend to assess AI specifically.

Technical Effect in the Problem-Solution Approach

Several updates in G-VII-5.2 relate to technical effects in the problem-solution approach. The Guidelines now explicitly acknowledge that a technical effect submitted during proceedings can be relied upon for an inventive step argument, with T 116/18 confirming these need not be literally disclosed in the original application. However the two criteria from T 1989/19 must be met cumulatively: effects must be encompassed by the technical teaching and embodied by the originally disclosed invention.

Digital Updates

The Guidelines have also been updated to reflect the EPO's ongoing digital transformation. There are updates to the Guidelines in several places regarding the use of MyEPO Portfolio, the EPO's new digital tool for managing communications and correspondence with professional representatives.

There’s information regarding a shared space functionality (detailed in C-VII-2.6, referencing OJ EPO 2023, A59). The ‘shared-area’ allows applicants and examiners to jointly edit documents during consultations and upload and modify documents before and during consultations.

There’s also information regarding fee waivers for MyEPO Portfolio users (A-X-5.2.7), streamlined refunds (A-X-10.3.3) and digital delivery of translations and non-patent literature via MyEPO Portfolio (B-X-11.2)

For the preview of the changes in full, see here.

AI for patents.

Be 50%+ more productive. Join thousands of legal professionals around the World using Solve’s Patent Copilot™ for drafting, prosecution, invention harvesting, and more.

Related articles

Marbury Law sees 3x-4x efficiency gain from using Solve Intelligence

Key Insights

  • AI adoption requires proof. Bob and his team tested multiple tools before committing, and only moved forward once they saw quantifiable results.
  • 3 to 4x efficiency gains changed the business case. By tracking his own drafting time, Bob demonstrated that AI-enabled workflows made fixed-fee work viable at partner rates.
  • Demonstration drives adoption. Live drafting sessions, client transparency, and side-by-side cost comparisons created full buy-in from both clients and colleagues.
  • Integrated chat removes friction. Keeping research, drafting, and revisions inside one contextual workspace eliminated copy-paste workflows and saved significant time.
  • Context is a force multiplier. AI performs best when it understands the full invention disclosure, file history, and drafting materials in one place.
  • Speed expands strategic value. Faster drafting didn’t just save time - it enabled better coverage, stronger enablement, and real-time responsiveness to client needs.

About Marbury Law

The Marbury Law Group is a premier mid-size, full-service intellectual property and technology law firm in the Washington, D.C. area, with additional strength in commercial law, litigation, and trademark litigation. Recognized by Juristat as a top 35 law firm nationwide and holding Martindale-Hubbell’s AV® Preeminent™ Peer Review Rating, Marbury serves clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies and mid-size technology businesses to high-tech startups and inventors. Its practitioners bring unusually wide-ranging experience, including former technology executives, government R&D managers, startup founders, in-house counsel, “big-law” attorneys, USPTO patent examiners, and judicial clerks. 

Marbury delivers “big-law” service with the flexibility and personal attention of a smaller firm, pairing high-quality work with efficient, budget-aware billing. Based near the USPTO, the firm has drafted and prosecuted thousands of U.S. and foreign patent applications and trademarks, and advises on IP strategy, diligence, and licensing. Formed in 2009 through the merger of two established practices (with roots dating back to 1994), the firm takes its name from Marbury v. Madison (1803), the landmark Supreme Court case that established judicial review.

Introduction

When we sat down with Bob Hansen for this conversation, we knew it would be grounded in both legal depth and real-world business experience. Bob is a founding partner of The Marbury Law Group and has extensive experience across patent prosecution, litigation, licensing, portfolio strategy, and complex IP transactions. But what makes his perspective particularly compelling is that he also brings 20 years of real-world experience as an engineer, program manager, and business executive in Fortune 50 companies and start-ups. He understands firsthand how innovation moves from idea to product, and how intellectual property law fits into that journey.

That dual lens is exactly why we wanted to have this discussion. Bob evaluates technology not just as a patent attorney, but as someone who has managed engineering teams, navigated acquisitions and divestitures, raised capital, and built businesses. When someone with that background says AI has been transformative and backs it up with measurable 3 to 4x efficiency gains, it’s worth listening.

Introducing Solve Review: A Practical Guide to AI-Powered Patent Review

Patent drafting doesn’t end when the first draft is complete. In many ways, the most important work begins at review.

Jurisdictional compliance, internal style alignment, claim clarity, sufficiency of disclosure, and formal requirements. Each aspect of drafting applications must be carefully checked before filing. Yet a thorough review is time-intensive, difficult to standardize, and hard to scale across teams and large portfolios, especially when up against a tight deadline.

Enter Solve Review

With Solve Review, practitioners can run structured, customizable AI-powered reviews in minutes rather than hours, while maintaining transparency, collaboration, and full control over the output. 

Teams using Solve Review report dramatically, with multi-pass manual reviews that previously took three to four hours completing in a fraction of the time

Key benefits

  • AI-powered patent reviews in minutes
  • Each review is fully customizable
  • Save your reviews as templates, run multiple reviews per application
  • Full transparency of working out and results
  • Resolve issues detected by Solve Review with AI

Potter Clarkson Enhances Patent Practice with Solve Intelligence

Solve Intelligence is deployed at Potter Clarkson as a practitioner-led platform, designed to enhance - not replace - the expertise of experienced patent attorneys. The firm uses the technology primarily at a senior level, where skilled practitioners are able to prompt and interrogate the system effectively to guide high-quality outputs.

By combining advanced AI capability with deep technical and legal experience, the platform enables senior attorneys to work more efficiently while focusing their time and judgement on strategic advice, complex analysis and client value. This reflects the firm’s long-standing philosophy that technology should strengthen the role of the practitioner, not substitute professional expertise.

“At Potter Clarkson, our priority is delivering technically rigorous and strategically sound advice to our clients. We use Solve Intelligence as a tool in the hands of experienced patent attorneys - professionals who understand how to guide, challenge and refine AI-generated outputs. It allows our senior teams to concentrate on the aspects of drafting and prosecution where their judgement adds the greatest value, while maintaining full control over quality and client strategy.”

Peter Finnie, Partner, Potter Clarkson

Since rolling out Solve Intelligence’s Patent Copilot, the firm has tailored the platform to reflect its established house styles and drafting standards. This customisation reduces administrative burden and supports consistency across teams, enabling practitioners to engage with AI efficiently without compromising on quality, client-specific requirements, or the firm’s distinctive approach.

Peter Finnie to join Solve's Customer Advisory Board

We are excited to welcome Peter Finnie, Partner at Potter Clarkson, to Solve Intelligence’s Customer Advisory Board.