Skip to main content Skip to footer
HomeHome
 
  • Homepage
  • Searching for patents

    Patent knowledge

    Access our patent databases and search tools.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
      • European Publication Server
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
      • European Patent Bulletin
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
      • Web services
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
    • Technology platforms
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
      • Water innovation
      • Space innovation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
      • Firefighting technologies
      • Clean energy technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Overview
      • First time here?
      • Asian patent information
      • Patent information centres
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
    Image
    Plastics in Transition

    Technology insight report on plastic waste management

  • Applying for a patent

    Applying for a patent

    Practical information on filing and grant procedures.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • European route
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Request for extension/validation
    • International route (PCT)
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide – PCT procedure at the EPO
      • EPO decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • Find a professional representative
    • MyEPO services
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
      • Get access
      • File with us
      • Interact with us on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Forms
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Fees
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
      • International fees (PCT)
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
      • Fee payment and refunds
      • Warning

    UP

    Find out how the Unitary Patent can enhance your IP strategy

  • Law & practice

    Law & practice

    European patent law, the Official Journal and other legal texts.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
      • Unitary patent system
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent
    • Court practices
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
    Image
    Law and practice scales 720x237

    Keep up with key aspects of selected BoA decisions with our monthly "Abstracts of decisions”

  • News & events

    News & events

    Our latest news, podcasts and events, including the European Inventor Award.

    Go to overview 

     

    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Overview
      • The meaning of tomorrow
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the finalists
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventor Prize
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
    • Press centre
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • Innovation and patenting in focus
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
      • Green tech in focus
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
      • The future of medicine
      • Materials science
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
      • Patent classification
      • Digital technologies
      • The future of manufacturing
      • Books by EPO experts
    • "Talk innovation" podcast

    Podcast

    From ideas to inventions: tune into our podcast for the latest in tech and IP

  • Learning

    Learning

    The European Patent Academy – the point of access to your learning

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Overview
      • Learning activities
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Overview
      • EQE - European qualifying examination
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
      • National offices and IP authorities
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and technology transfer centres (TTOs)
    Image
    Patent Academy catalogue

    Have a look at the extensive range of learning opportunities in the European Patent Academy training catalogue

  • About us

    About us

    Find out more about our work, values, history and vision

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Overview
      • Official celebrations
      • Member states’ video statements
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states of the European Patent Organisation
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
      • Administrative Council
    • Principles & strategy
      • Overview
      • Our mission, vision, values and corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
      • Towards a New Normal
    • Leadership & management
      • Overview
      • President António Campinos
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Overview
      • Environmental
      • Social
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Services & activities
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Overview
      • Innovation actors
      • Policy and funding
      • Tools
      • About the Observatory
    • Procurement
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering and electronic signatures
      • Procurement portal
      • Invoicing
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Transparency portal
      • Overview
      • General
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
      • "Long Night"
    Image
    Patent Index 2024 keyvisual showing brightly lit up data chip, tinted in purple, bright blue

    Track the latest tech trends with our Patent Index

 
en de fr
  • Language selection
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
Main navigation
  • Homepage
    • Go back
    • New to patents
  • New to patents
    • Go back
    • Your business and patents
    • Why do we have patents?
    • What's your big idea?
    • Are you ready?
    • What to expect
    • How to apply for a patent
    • Is it patentable?
    • Are you first?
    • Patent quiz
    • Unitary patent video
  • Searching for patents
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • National patent office databases
        • Global Patent Index (GPI)
        • Release notes
      • European Publication Server
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
        • Cross-reference index for Euro-PCT applications
        • EP authority file
        • Help
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes archive
        • Register documentation
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Deep link data coverage
          • Federated Register
          • Register events
      • European Patent Bulletin
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Download Bulletin
        • EP Bulletin search
        • Help
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Manuals
        • Sequence listings
        • National full-text data
        • European Patent Register data
        • EPO worldwide bibliographic data (DOCDB)
        • EP full-text data
        • EPO worldwide legal event data (INPADOC)
        • EP bibliographic data (EBD)
        • Boards of Appeal decisions
      • Web services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • European Publication Server web service
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
        • Go back
        • Weekly updates
        • Updated regularly
    • Technology platforms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Plastics waste recovery
        • Plastics waste recycling
        • Alternative plastics
      • Innovation in water technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Clean water
        • Protection from water
      • Space innovation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Cosmonautics
        • Space observation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Prevention and early detection
        • Diagnostics
        • Therapies
        • Wellbeing and aftercare
      • Firefighting technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Detection and prevention of fires
        • Fire extinguishing
        • Protective equipment
        • Post-fire restoration
      • Clean energy technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Renewable energy
        • Carbon-intensive industries
        • Energy storage and other enabling technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Vaccines and therapeutics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Vaccines
          • Overview of candidate therapies for COVID-19
          • Candidate antiviral and symptomatic therapeutics
          • Nucleic acids and antibodies to fight coronavirus
        • Diagnostics and analytics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Protein and nucleic acid assays
          • Analytical protocols
        • Informatics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Bioinformatics
          • Healthcare informatics
        • Technologies for the new normal
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Devices, materials and equipment
          • Procedures, actions and activities
          • Digital technologies
        • Inventors against coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • First time here?
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Basic definitions
        • Patent classification
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC)
        • Patent families
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • DOCDB simple patent family
          • INPADOC extended patent family
        • Legal event data
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • INPADOC classification scheme
      • Asian patent information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • China (CN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Chinese Taipei (TW)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • India (IN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
        • Japan (JP)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Korea (KR)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Russian Federation (RU)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Numbering system
          • Searching in databases
        • Useful links
      • Patent information centres (PATLIB)
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
  • Applying for a patent
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • European route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
        • Go back
        • Oral proceedings calendar
          • Go back
          • Calendar
          • Public access to appeal proceedings
          • Public access to opposition proceedings
          • Technical guidelines
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Unitary Patent
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Legal framework
          • Main features
          • Applying for a Unitary Patent
          • Cost of a Unitary Patent
          • Translation and compensation
          • Start date
          • Introductory brochures
        • Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Extension/validation request
    • International route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide
      • Entry into the European phase
      • Decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
        • Go back
        • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programme outline
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • MyEPO services
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Exchange data with us using an API
          • Go back
          • Release notes
      • Get access
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
      • File with us
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • What if our online filing services are down?
        • Release notes
      • Interact with us on your files
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Fees
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • International fees (PCT)
        • Go back
        • Reduction in fees
        • Fees for international applications
        • Decisions and notices
        • Overview
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • Fee payment and refunds
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Payment methods
        • Getting started
        • FAQs and other documentation
        • Technical information for batch payments
        • Decisions and notices
        • Release notes
      • Warning
    • Forms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Find a professional representative
  • Law & practice
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Documentation on the EPC revision 2000
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Diplomatic Conference for the revision of the EPC
            • Travaux préparatoires
            • New text
            • Transitional provisions
            • Implementing regulations to the EPC 2000
            • Rules relating to Fees
            • Ratifications and accessions
          • Travaux Préparatoires EPC 1973
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • EPC Guidelines
        • PCT-EPO Guidelines
        • Unitary Patent Guidelines
        • Guidelines revision cycle
        • Consultation results
        • Summary of user responses
        • Archive
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Unitary Patent system
        • Go back
        • Travaux préparatoires to UP and UPC
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent 
    • Court practices
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
  • News & events
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The meaning of tomorrow
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the inventors
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
        • Go back
        • 2024 activities
        • 2025 activities
        • Rules and criteria
        • FAQ
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
      • The 2025 event
    • Press centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • European Patent Office
        • Q&A on patents related to coronavirus
        • Q&A on plant patents
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • In focus
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
        • Go back
        • CodeFest Spring 2025 on classifying patent data for sustainable development
        • Overview
        • CodeFest 2024 on generative AI
        • CodeFest 2023 on Green Plastics
      • Green tech in focus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About green tech
        • Renewable energies
        • Energy transition technologies
        • Building a greener future
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patents and space technologies
      • Healthcare
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Medical technologies and cancer
        • Personalised medicine
      • Materials science
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Red, white or green
        • The role of the EPO
        • What is patentable?
        • Biotech inventors
      • Classification
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
        • Climate change mitigation technologies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • External partners
          • Updates on Y02 and Y04S
      • Digital technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About ICT
        • Hardware and software
        • Artificial intelligence
        • Fourth Industrial Revolution
      • Additive manufacturing
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About AM
        • AM innovation
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast
  • Learning
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Learning activities: types and formats
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • EQE - European Qualifying Examination
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compendium
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Paper F
          • Paper A
          • Paper B
          • Paper C
          • Paper D
          • Pre-examination
        • Candidates successful in the European qualifying examination
        • Archive
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Innovation case studies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • SME case studies
          • Technology transfer case studies
          • High-growth technology case studies
        • Inventor's handbook
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Introduction
          • Disclosure and confidentiality
          • Novelty and prior art
          • Competition and market potential
          • Assessing the risk ahead
          • Proving the invention
          • Protecting your idea
          • Building a team and seeking funding
          • Business planning
          • Finding and approaching companies
          • Dealing with companies
        • Best of search matters
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Tools and databases
          • EPO procedures and initiatives
          • Search strategies
          • Challenges and specific topics
        • Support for high-growth technology businesses
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Business decision-makers
          • IP professionals
          • Stakeholders of the Innovation Ecosystem
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Paper F brain-teasers
        • Daily D questions
        • European qualifying examination - Guide for preparation
        • EPAC
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compulsory licensing in Europe
        • The jurisdiction of European courts in patent disputes
      • National offices and IP authorities
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Learning material for examiners of national officers
        • Learning material for formalities officers and paralegals
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and TTOs
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Modular IP Education Framework (MIPEF)
        • Pan-European Seal Young Professionals Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • For students
          • For universities
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • IP education resources
            • University memberships
          • Our young professionals
          • Professional development plan
        • Academic Research Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Completed research projects
          • Current research projects
        • IP Teaching Kit
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Download modules
        • Intellectual property course design manual
        • PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa
          • Go back
          • The PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa initiative (KT2A)
          • KT2A core activities
          • Success story: Malawi University of Science and Technology and PATLIB Birmingham
  • About us
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Go back
      • Official celebrations
      • Overview
      • Member states’ video statements
        • Go back
        • Albania
        • Austria
        • Belgium
        • Bulgaria
        • Croatia
        • Cyprus
        • Czech Republic
        • Denmark
        • Estonia
        • Finland
        • France
        • Germany
        • Greece
        • Hungary
        • Iceland
        • Ireland
        • Italy
        • Latvia
        • Liechtenstein
        • Lithuania
        • Luxembourg
        • Malta
        • Monaco
        • Montenegro
        • Netherlands
        • North Macedonia
        • Norway
        • Poland
        • Portugal
        • Romania
        • San Marino
        • Serbia
        • Slovakia
        • Slovenia
        • Spain
        • Sweden
        • Switzerland
        • Türkiye
        • United Kingdom
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Member states by date of accession
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
        • Go back
        • 2024
        • Overview
        • 2023
        • 2022
        • 2021
        • 2020
        • 2019
        • 2018
        • 2017
        • 2016
        • 2015
        • 2014
        • 2013
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Select Committee documents
      • Administrative Council
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Composition
        • Representatives
        • Rules of Procedure
        • Board of Auditors
        • Secretariat
        • Council bodies
    • Principles & strategy
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Mission, vision, values & corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
        • Go back
        • Driver 1: People
        • Driver 2: Technologies
        • Driver 3: High-quality, timely products and services
        • Driver 4: Partnerships
        • Driver 5: Financial sustainability
      • Towards a New Normal
      • Data protection & privacy notice
    • Leadership & management
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the President
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Environmental
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring environmental inventions
      • Social
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring social inventions
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Procurement
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) publications
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering
      • Invoicing
      • Procurement portal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • e-Signing contracts
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Services & activities
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Foundations
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • European Patent Convention
          • Guidelines for examination
          • Our staff
        • Enabling quality
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Prior art
          • Classification
          • Tools
          • Processes
        • Products & services
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
          • Continuous improvement
        • Quality through networking
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • User engagement
          • Co-operation
          • User satisfaction survey
          • Stakeholder Quality Assurance Panels
        • Patent Quality Charter
        • Quality Action Plan
        • Quality dashboard
        • Statistics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
        • Integrated management at the EPO
      • Consulting our users
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Standing Advisory Committee before the EPO (SACEPO)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Objectives
          • SACEPO and its working parties
          • Meetings
          • Single Access Portal – SACEPO Area
        • Surveys
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Detailed methodology
          • Search services
          • Examination services, final actions and publication
          • Opposition services
          • Formalities services
          • Customer services
          • Filing services
          • Key Account Management (KAM)
          • Website
          • Archive
      • Our user service charter
      • European and international co-operation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Co-operation with member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
        • Bilateral co-operation with non-member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Validation system
          • Reinforced Partnership programme
        • Multilateral international co-operation with IP offices and organisations
        • Co-operation with international organisations outside the IP system
      • European Patent Academy
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Partners
      • Chief Economist
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Economic studies
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Innovation against cancer
      • Innovation actors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Startups and SMEs
      • Policy and funding
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Financing innovation programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Our studies on the financing of innovation
          • EPO initiatives for patent applicants
          • Financial support for innovators in Europe
        • Patents and standards
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Publications
          • Patent standards explorer
      • Tools
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Deep Tech Finder
      • About the Observatory
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Work plan
    • Transparency portal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • General
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Annual Review 2023
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • 50 years of the EPC
          • Strategic key performance indicators
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
        • Annual Review 2022
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
        • Go back
        • Insight into computer technology and AI
        • Insight into clean energy technologies
        • Statistics and indicators
          • Go back
          • European patent applications
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Top 10 technical fields
              • Go back
              • Computer technology
              • Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
              • Digital communication
              • Medical technology
              • Transport
              • Measurement
              • Biotechnology
              • Pharmaceuticals
              • Other special machines
              • Organic fine chemistry
            • All technical fields
          • Applicants
            • Go back
            • Top 50
            • Categories
            • Women inventors
          • Granted patents
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Designations
      • Data to download
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
        • Go back
        • Catalyst lab & Deep vision
          • Go back
          • Irene Sauter (DE)
          • AVPD (DK)
          • Jan Robert Leegte (NL)
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #1
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #2
          • Péter Szalay (HU)
          • Thomas Feuerstein (AT)
          • Tom Burr (US)
          • Wolfgang Tillmans (DE)
          • TerraPort
          • Unfinished Sculpture - Captives #1
          • Deep vision – immersive exhibition
          • Previous exhibitions
        • The European Patent Journey
        • Sustaining life. Art in the climate emergency
        • Next generation statements
        • Open storage
        • Cosmic bar
      • "Long Night"
  • Boards of Appeal
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Decisions of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Recent decisions
      • Selected decisions
    • Information from the Boards of Appeal
    • Procedure
    • Oral proceedings
    • About the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • President of the Boards of Appeal
      • Enlarged Board of Appeal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Pending referrals (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Decisions sorted by number (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Pending petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
        • Decisions on petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
      • Technical Boards of Appeal
      • Legal Board of Appeal
      • Disciplinary Board of Appeal
      • Presidium
        • Go back
        • Overview
    • Code of Conduct
    • Business distribution scheme
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technical boards of appeal by IPC in 2025
      • Archive
    • Annual list of cases
    • Communications
    • Annual reports
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
      • Go back
      • Abstracts of decisions
    • Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Archive
  • Service & support
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • FAQ
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
    • Ordering
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Knowledge Products and Services
      • Terms and conditions
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patent information products
        • Bulk data sets
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • Fair use charter
    • Procedural communications
    • Useful links
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent offices of member states
      • Other patent offices
      • Directories of patent attorneys
      • Patent databases, registers and gazettes
      • Disclaimer
    • Contact us
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Filing options
      • Locations
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
    • RSS feeds
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2025 decisions
  • 2024 decisions
  • 2023 decisions
  1. Home
  2. T 0137/01 15-12-2003
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0137/01 15-12-2003

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2003:T013701.20031215
Date of decision
15 December 2003
Case number
T 0137/01
Petition for review of
-
Application number
92115510.7
IPC class
A61F 13/15
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 825.33 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

Absorbent composites and absorbent articles containing same

Applicant name
KIMBERLY-CLARK WORLDWIDE, INC.
Opponent name

Stockhausen GmbH & Co. KG

The Procter & Gamble Company

SCA Research AB

Nippon Shokubai Company Limited

Board
3.2.06
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 83 1973
European Patent Convention Art 84 1973
European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973
Keywords

Sufficiency of disclosure (no) - main request

Clarity (no), added subject-matter (yes) - auxiliary request

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
T 0409/91
T 0685/90
Citing decisions
T 0624/08
T 1600/19
T 1884/19
T 0773/06

I. The appeal is from the decision of the Opposition Division posted on 30 October 2000 to reject the oppositions filed against European patent No. 0 532 002, granted in respect of European patent application No. 92115510.7.

In the decision under appeal the Opposition Division considered that the scope of claim 1 was restricted to superabsorbent particles having a size of between 300 and 600 microns or superabsorbent fibres and concluded that the skilled person could carry out the invention on the basis of specific disclosures of the patent in suit in this respect.

Furthermore, the Opposition Division held that the claimed subject-matter was novel and involved an inventive step.

II. The appellants (opponents I to IV) lodged appeals against this decision. The appeals were received at the EPO on 20, 22, 20. and 28 December 2000 respectively. The appeal fees were paid on 27, 22, 20 and 28 December 2000 respectively. The statements setting out the grounds of appeal were received at the EPO on 27, 15, 28 and 26 February 2001 respectively.

III. In an annex to the summons for oral proceedings pursuant to Article 11(2) Rules of Procedure of the boards of appeal the Board expressed its preliminary opinion that particles having a size below 300 or above 600 µm were excluded from the disclosed test procedure for determining the values of the parameters "Deformation under Load" (DUL) and "Wicking Index" (WI) and that the requirement of sufficiency of disclosure was linked to the question of whether claim 1 excluded a superabsorbent material with particles of a size outside the range of 300 to 600 µm. Furthermore, the Board stated that it would appear that the test results filed by the appellants in respect of the superabsorbent materials used in the absorbent composite referred to in document

D2: DE-C-4 020 780

supported the conclusion that the subject-matter of claim 1 lacked novetly.

IV. In response to the Board's preliminary opinion, the respondent (patentee) filed with a letter dated 14 November 2003 new claims forming the basis for a new main request for maintenance of the patent in amended form.

V. Oral proceedings took place on 15 December 2003.

The appellants requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be revoked.

The respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed and that the patent be maintained on the basis of the main request filed with a letter dated 14 November 2003 or alternatively on the basis of the auxiliary request filed during the oral proceedings.

VI. Claim 1 of the main request reads as follows:

"An absorbent composite comprising a matrix of fibers and superabsorbent material characterized by having at least about 50. weight percent superabsorbent material based on the combined weight of the fibers and the superabsorbent material, said superabsorbent material having a Deformation Under Load (DUL) of 0.4 millimeters or less and a Wicking Index (WI) of 12. centimeters or greater."

Claim 1 of the auxiliary request reads as follows:

"An absorbent composite comprising a matrix of fibers and superabsorbent material characterized by having at least about 50 weight percent superabsorbent material based on the combined weight of the fibers and the superabsorbent material, said at least 50 weight superabsorbent material having a particle size between 300 and 600 µm and a Deformation Under Load (DUL) of 0.4. millimeters or less and a Wicking Index (WI) of 12 centimeters or greater."

VII. In support of its requests appellant I relied essentially on the following submissions:

Since claim 1 of the main request referred in general to a superabsorbent material its scope included an absorbent composite comprising not only superabsorbent particles of a size within the range of 300 to 600 µm, but also outside this range, in particular small particles having a size below 300 µm. Such small particles would fill the spaces between the greater particles and would thereby impair the wicking ability of the superabsorbent material. Therefore it was clear that the wicking index was not an intrinsic feature of the superabsorbent material but one dependent on the particle size distribution within the superabsorbent material. As a consequence, claim 1 failed to give a clear teaching to the skilled person on how to select a superabsorbent material having a good ability to wick away fluid.

Claim 1 of the auxiliary request did not meet the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC because the application as filed did not disclose that the superabsorbent material comprised only particles of a size between 300 and 600 µm, but only that such particles were used when carrying out the test for measuring the deformation under load and the wicking index. Nor was the claim clear in that respect, contrary to Article 84 EPC, since it left open the possibility that the superabsorbent material comprised particles of a size outside the range of 300 to 600 µm.

VIII. Appellant II essentially submitted that according to the patent in suit both the wicking index and the deformation under load were measured on a fraction of the superabsorbent material, namely on particles having a size of 300 to 600 µm obtained after sieving the superabsorbent material. However, such a fraction could not be regarded as representative of the behaviour of the whole superabsorbent material as regards its ability to wick away fluid (wicking index) and its ability to maintain wicking channels when swollen (deformation under load). For instance, claim 1 of the main request included the case of a superabsorbent material consisting mainly of particles having a size smaller than 300 µm in which a very small amount of particles in the range of 300 to 600 µm was added. However, such small amount could not be representative of the behaviour of the entire superabsorbent material. Moreover, different values for the deformation under load and the wicking index were obtained if the tests described in the patent in suit were carried out on both sieved and unsieved superabsorbent material, as shown by the results of tests carried out by appellant II. The patent failed to specify how much of the superabsorbent material should consist of particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm and it left to the skilled person the selection of a proper amount thereof. The patent, however, did not contain any information enabling the skilled person to infer whether any specific selections would fulfil the invention, ie whether the technical problem underlying the patent in suit would be effectively solved by any such selection.

Table I of the patent in suit did not support the respondent's allegation that the size of the particles was irrelevant for the performance of the invention. Indeed, table I related exclusively to the case of an absorbent composite comprising 50% superabsorbent material and 50% fluff whilst claim 1 of the main request was not so limited. Moreover, the results listed in table I were based on a comparison made with a commercially available diaper manufactured by the respondent itself and the results might look different if the comparison were made with other available diapers.

Claim 1 of the auxiliary request was ambiguous because it could either be interpreted as relating to an absorbent composite comprising superabsorbent material with only particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm, or as relating to an absorbent composite comprising superabsorbent particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm but also superabsorbent particles outside this range. For the first interpretation, which was the one intended by the respondent, there was no support in the application as filed, contrary to the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC, because the application as filed did not disclose that the sieving step could be dispensed with when carrying out the test for measuring the deformation under load and the wicking index of a superabsorbent material for use in the claimed absorbent. Moreover, superabsorbent particles of a size from 300 to 600 µm usually formed a minor portion only of the whole superabsorbent material, as shown for instance by document

D5: EP-A-0 339 461.

IX. The arguments of appellant III can be summarised as follows.

The removal of the term "about" in respect of the values for the deformation under load and the wicking index specified in claim 1 was contrary to the requirements of Article 84 and 123(2) EPC. In fact, with the tests for measuring the deformation under load and the wicking index disclosed in the patent in suit it was not possible to obtain precise figures, and therefore there was no support at all for any figure which was not "about".

As regards sufficiency of disclosure, appellant III concurred with appellant II's arguments and additionally submitted that in order to determine which specific content of superabsorbent particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm was acceptable the skilled person should carry out performance evaluation tests of the kind described in the patent in suit for various absorbent articles having a different content of superabsorbent particles of a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm. This however resulted in an undue burden on the skilled person. Table I of the patent in suit did not contain any information about the particle size distribution in the samples and therefore could not support the allegation that the particle size distribution was irrelevant for the attainment of the desired technical effects. Furthermore, in the present case the burden of proof was on the respondent to show that the invention could be performed in the whole range claimed.

Also in respect of claim 1 of the auxiliary request appellant III essentially concurred with appellant II's arguments and added that although the application as filed disclosed that the test for measuring the deformation under load and the wicking index was carried out using superabsorbent particles which were sieved such as to have a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm, there was no disclosure to put the sieved particles only in an absorbent composite.

X. Appellant IV essentially agreed with the objections under Articles 84 and 123(2) EPC raised by appellant III, and additionally submitted that the presence of the expression "about 50 weight percent" rendered the claim unclear, because it did not define a precise limitation.

As regards sufficiency of disclosure, appellant IV essentially submitted that the test procedure disclosed in the patent in suit for determining the values of deformation under load and wicking index of the superabsorbent particles only gave information about the behaviour of a small fraction of the superabsorbent material, namely the fraction consisting of particles having a size within the range of 300 to 600 µm, but could not be used to evaluate the behaviour of the whole superabsorbent material which usually comprised a majority of particles outside that range. Moreover, there was no disclosure in the patent in suit of a method for determining the deformation under load and the wicking index of said whole superabsorbent material. Considering that claim 1 of the main request defined values for the deformation under load and the wicking index of the superabsorbent material as a whole ("said superabsorbent material having a Deformation Under Load..."), it followed that the invention was not sufficiently disclosed.

As regards claim 1 of the auxiliary request, appellant IV agreed with the other appellants that it lacked clarity but raised no objections under Article 123(2) EPC if claim 1 was understood to seek protection for an absorbent composite comprising only superabsorbent particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm.

XI. The respondent disputed the appellant's views and essentially argued as follows.

Since the expression "about 50 weight percent" was already present in a dependent claim as granted, clarity thereof should not be an issue, in accordance with the case law of the boards of appeal. The removal of the term "about" in respect of the values for the deformation under load and the wicking index in claim 1 corresponded to the common practice of the examining divisions of the EPO according to which approximate terms in claims should be avoided. By means of this amendment, claim 1 was restricted to a precise value and thus defined a clear limitation. In any case, the claim had to be read with the eyes of a skilled person and not in a formalistic way.

Claim 1 of the main request required the absorbent composite to contain a superabsorbent material for which the deformation under load and the wicking index could be measured by means of the test disclosed in the patent in suit. Since the test required sieving out particles of a size between 300 to 600 µm, it was clear that the superabsorbent material referred to in claim 1 necessarily included an amount of such particles. The sieving step, which was common practice in the art, was necessary in order to compare superabsorbent materials of the same scale as they usually came in different particle-size distributions. Furthermore, the deformation under load and the wicking index were primarily intrinsic properties of the superabsorbent material, and the size range of 300 to 600 µm was the most common for superabsorbent particles. In any case, the appellants did not demonstrate the existence of any superabsorbent material for which the values of deformation under load and wicking index could be measured with the test procedure disclosed in the patent in suit, which measured values fell within the terms of claim 1, that failed to work well and thereby provide a solution to the problem underlying the patent in suit. The burden of proof concerning this issue was on the appellants. Moreover, for a particular superabsorbent material fulfilling the requirements of claim 1 in respect of deformation under load and wicking index, benefits were obtained across the whole range of particle-size distribution. Indeed, as evidenced by table I of the patent in suit, the size of the particles was essentially irrelevant for the performance of the invention. The deformation under load and the wicking index were parameters that predicted how a given material performed at any particle size. The contrary had not been demonstrated by the appellants.

Claim 1 of the auxiliary request was clearly restricted to an absorbent composite comprising only superabsorbent particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm. Support for this feature was found in claims 1 and 19 of the patent as granted, read in conjunction with page 5. In fact, it was clear from the disclosure on page 5 that two possibilities were envisaged: either the superabsorbent material comprised only particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm, or it comprised such particles and also particles having a size outside the range of 300 to 600 µm. The first possibility, which was more restricted, clearly represented a preferred embodiment of the invention.

1. The appeals are admissible.

2. The main request

2.1. Amendments (Articles 123 and 84 EPC)

2.1.1. The wording of claim 1 is based on the disclosure of claims 1, 3 and 6 of the application as filed, with the only difference that claims 3 and 6 recite "Deformation Under Load of about 0.4 millimeter or less" and "Wicking Index of about 12. centimeters or greater" whilst claim 1 omits the term "about" in these expressions.

The Board takes the view that in the present context, considering that the claim must be read with the eyes of a skilled person as correctly pointed out by the respondent, the omission of the term "about" does not result in the claim containing subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed. In fact, both the test procedure for measuring the deformation under load (page 5 of the patent in suit, line 20 ff.) and the test procedure for measuring the wicking index (page 6 of the patent in suit, line 15 ff.) require several manipulations and various measurement readings which are a source of errors. Thus, it is clear that these test procedures can only give measurements of the deformation under load and of the wicking index with a certain approximation (measurement error). Therefore, it is clear for the skilled person that the expressions "Deformation Under Load of 0.4 millimeter or less" and "Wicking Index of 12. centimeters or greater" in claim 1 refer in practice to approximate limits for the deformation under load and the wicking index. For this reason, they are equivalent in substance to the expressions "Deformation Under Load of about 0.4 millimeter or less" and "Wicking Index of about 12 centimeters or greater", respectively, recited in the claims of the application as filed.

It follows that the amendments of claim 1 are not contrary to the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC. They also do not give rise to objections under Article 123(3) EPC, as they restrict the protection conferred.

2.1.2. Since, as explained above, it is of no significance whether the term "about" is attached or not to the numerical values of the deformation under load and of the wicking index defined in claim 1 (because in any case such numerical values must be regarded as approximate), the omission of the term "about" does not result in a lack of clarity or in a lack of support by the description that would constitute an infringement of Article 84 EPC.

2.1.3. As regards the objection of appellant IV that the expression "at least about 50 weight percent superabsorbent material" does not define a clear limitation in view of the presence of the term "about", the Board takes the view that this term does not render the claim unclear but merely underlines the fact that the limit for the percentage of superabsorbent material in the claimed absorbent composite should also be regarded as an approximate figure in view of the normal variations inherent in the processes of industrial manufacture of absorbent articles.

2.2. Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

2.2.1. The subject-matter of claim 1 concerns an absorbent composite which has

- at least about 50 weight percent superabsorbent material based on the combined weight of the fibres and the superabsorbent material, whereby

- said superabsorbent material has a Deformation Under Load (DUL) of 0.4 millimeters or less and a Wicking Index (WI) of 12. centimeters or greater.

Considering that the expression "said superabsorbent material" refers to the "at least about 50 weight percent superabsorbent material" based on the combined weight of the fibres and the superabsorbent material, ie to the whole superabsorbent material present in the absorbent composite, it is clear that claim 1 defines numerical limitations in respect of both the deformation under load and the wicking index for the whole superabsorbent material present in the absorbent composite.

For determining the "Deformation Under Load" and the "Wicking Index" of a given superabsorbent material there exists no standardised measurement procedure. In fact, none of these two parameters belongs to the skilled person's general knowledge. Since the claim does not include any information about how to measure the two parameters either, it is necessary to refer to the description of the patent in suit which discloses specific test procedures for determining the deformation under load and the wicking index "for the superabsorbent materials of this invention" (see page 5, lines 9 and 10, of the patent in suit). The test procedure for determining the deformation under load requires a sample of the superabsorbent material to be sieved to a particle size of between 300 and 600 µm (see page 5, lines 46 and 47, of the patent in suit). Only fibrous superabsorbent materials need not be sieved (page 5, line 48). Also the test procedure for determining the wicking index requires a sample of the superabsorbent material to be sieved to a particle size of between 300 and 600 µm (see page 6, lines 43 and 44, of the patent in suit). However, the patent is silent about how to proceed in determining the wicking index if fibrous superabsorbent materials are used. Therefore, assuming that the test procedures are sufficiently described so that they can be reproduced by a skilled person, the patent in suit discloses how to determine the deformation under load and the wicking index only for particles of superabsorbent material having a size of between 300 and 600 µm.

Claim 1, as confirmed by the respondent patentee's own admission, is not limited to absorbent composites comprising superabsorbent material consisting only of particles having a size of between 300 and 600 µm. Claim 1 is to be construed as encompassing the presence of superabsorbent material having the particle size distribution of products in the form sold by the manufacturer (however including particles of a size from 300 to 600 µm so that the deformation under load and the wicking index can be determined), in particular known superabsorbent material of the kind disclosed for instance by document D5 where particles having a size within the range of 300 to 600 µm only form a minor portion of the superabsorbent material (see D5, Table C, example I). The patent, however, does not disclose how much of a superabsorbent material with a generic particle size distribution must consist of particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm in order for the test results to be representative of the deformation under load and of the wicking index of the whole superabsorbent material. The patent even fails to specify the amount of particles having a size in the range of 300 to 600 µm in the superabsorbent materials used in the examples (see page 9 to 11 of the patent in suit). Therefore, if a superabsorbent material is used which comprises, for example, only a minor amount of particles within the range of 300 to 600 µm on the basis of which the deformation under load and the wicking index are determined, the disclosure of the patent in suit does not contain sufficient information to conclude that such superabsorbent material as a whole is suitable for achieving the desired effects underlying the patent in suit, which effects according to the wording of claim 1 are obtained when the measured values of the deformation under load and of the wicking index of the whole superabsorbent material fall within specific numerical ranges.

It follows that the disclosure of the patent in suit is not sufficient to allow the invention to be carried out within the whole area claimed (see eg T 409/91, OJ 1994, 653).

2.2.2. The respondent submitted that the deformation under load and the wicking index were primarily intrinsic properties of the superabsorbent material, and that these parameters predicted how a given material performed at any particle size.

It is a fact that in the patent in suit the deformation under load and the wicking index are determined on a sample of particles which have been sieved so that their size is within the range of 300 to 600 µm. By the patentee's own admission, the sieving step is necessary in order to compare superabsorbent materials on the same scale, as they usually come in different particle size distributions. If the deformation under load and the wicking index were independent of the particle size distribution within a given superabsorbent material, the sieving step would not be necessary. Thus, it is clear for the skilled person that the particle-size distribution actually plays a role in determining the deformation under load and the wicking index. Therefore, the skilled person trying to put into practice the invention is not in a position to establish to what extent the numerical limits for the deformation under load and the wicking index referred to in claim 1 can be correlated to those of a given superabsorbent material having a generic particle-size distribution which he intends to use. In other words, the skilled person is not in a position to know whether he is working within the area covered by the claim, in particular when the values of the deformation under load and of the wicking index are close to the numerical limits referred to in claim 1.

Nor can the data of table I of the patent in suit be regarded as evidence that the size of the particles is irrelevant in respect of the measurement of the deformation under load and of the wicking index, because there is no disclosure of the particle size distribution of the samples of superabsorbent materials used for obtaining the data of table I.

2.2.3. The respondent further submitted that the appellants did not demonstrate the existence of any superabsorbent material for which the values of deformation under load and wicking index could be measured with the test procedure disclosed in the patent in suit, which measured values fell within the terms of claim 1, that failed to work well and thereby provide a solution to the problem underlying the patent in suit.

In this respect, the Board notes that it does not deny that any superabsorbent material having a deformation under load and a wicking index measured on a sample consisting of particles having a size of 300 to 600 µm and falling within the terms of claim 1 might work well when used in an absorbent composite. However, this is not the point at issue. What is relevant is whether the deformation under load and the wicking index of such superabsorbent material can be correlated to the numerical ranges defined in claim 1, so that it is clear that the technical effects which are to be obtained when the requirements of claim 1 are met are effectively achieved. This, as explained above, cannot however be determined on the basis of the disclosure of the patent in suit.

2.2.4. Therefore, the main request is not allowable because the claimed invention is not disclosed in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art (Article 83 EPC).

3. The auxiliary request

3.1. During oral proceedings, the respondent declared that claim 1 was amended in order to restrict it to superabsorbent materials exclusively comprising particles of a size between 300 and 600 µm.

However, the wording of claim 1 is ambiguous in this respect because it leaves room for two possible interpretations: a first, according to which the superabsorbent material comprises particles of a size between 300 and 600 µm but also particles of a size outside this range, and a second according to which the superabsorbent material comprises only particles of a size between 300 and 600 µm.

Therefore, since claim 1 does not clearly define the intended limitation, it does not meet the requirements of Article 84 EPC.

3.2. If claim 1 is interpreted as intended by the respondent to be directed to an absorbent composite comprising a superabsorbent material consisting of (ie comprising only) particles of a size between 300 and 600 µm, then the amendment must be regarded as introducing subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed, contrary to the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC, because the resulting absorbent composite is not disclosed in the application as filed. It is true that the test procedures for determining the deformation under load and the wicking index require a sample of the superabsorbent material to be sieved to a particle size between 300 and 600 µm (see page 6, lines 4 to 6, and page 7, lines 10 to 12, of the published application). However, there is no direct and unambiguous disclosure (see eg T 685/90, point 2 of the reasons) that it is this sieved superabsorbent material which is used in the absorbent composite.

3.3. The respondent referred to the passage on page 5 of the patent in suit, according to which the test procedures disclosed are for determining the deformation under load and the wicking index "for the superabsorbent materials of this invention" (page 5, lines 9 and 10) and to the passage on the same page 5 according to which the sample of the superabsorbent material used for determining the deformation under load "has been sieved to a particle size between 300 and 600 µm" (page 5, lines 46 and 47).

However, it cannot be unambiguously derived from these passages that the superabsorbent materials of the invention may consist of the sieved superabsorbent particles. On the contrary, the disclosure on page 5 conveys the impression that the superabsorbent material of the invention, ie the one used in the absorbent composite, must be sieved, and that it therefore also comprises particles that do not have a size within the range of 300 to 600 µm.

3.4. Accordingly, the auxiliary request cannot be allowed because claim 1 does not meet the requirements of Articles 84 and 123(2) EPC.

Order

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.

Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility