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
      • Searching Asian documents: patent search and monitoring services
      • EP full-text search
      • Bibliographic coverage in Espacenet and OPS
      • Full-text coverage in Espacenet and OPS
    • Legal information
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
      • European Patent Bulletin
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Searching Asian documents
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
      • Patent insight reports
    • Data
      • Overview
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
      • Web services
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
    • 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

    UP search

    Learn about the Unitary Patent in patent knowledge products and services

  • 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
    • MyEPO services
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
      • Get access
      • Find a professional representative
      • File with us
      • Interact on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
      • Tutorials
    • Forms
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Fees
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
      • International fees (PCT)
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
      • Fee payment and refunds
      • Warning

    UP

    Unitary Patent

  • 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
      • EPC Guidelines
      • PCT-EPO Guidelines
      • Guidelines revision cycle
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
      • Unitary patent system
      • National law relating to the UP
    • 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

    legal text

    Legal texts

  • 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
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the finalists
      • Nominations
      • Watch the 2022 ceremony
    • 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
      • Firefighting technologies
      • Green tech in focus
      • CodeFest on Green Plastics
      • Clean energy technologies
      • IP and youth
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Fighting coronavirus
      • 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

    Listen to our podcast

  • Learning

    Learning

    The e-Academy – the point of access to your learning

    Go to overview 

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

    European Patent Academy

    Boost your IP knowledge with (e-)training from the European Patent Academy

  • 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
      • A glimpse of the planned activities
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states of the European Patent Organisation
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Governance
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Select Committee documents
      • Administrative Council
    • Principles & strategy
      • Overview
      • Our mission, vision, values and corporate policy
      • Public consultation on the EPO's Strategic Plan 2028
      • Towards a New Normal
    • Leadership & management
      • Overview
      • President António Campinos
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Social responsibility
      • Overview
      • Environment and sustainability
      • Art collection
    • Services & activities
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Procurement
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • 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
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s

    about us

    Patent Index 2022

 
en de fr
  • Language selection
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
Main navigation
  • Homepage
  • New to patents
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • What's your big idea?
    • Are you ready?
    • What to expect
    • How to apply for a patent
    • Your business and patents
    • Is it patentable?
    • Are you first?
    • Why do we have patents?
    • 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
        • Cross-reference index for Euro-PCT applications
        • EP authority file
        • Help
      • Searching Asian documents
      • EP full-text search
      • Bibliographic coverage in Espacenet and OPS
      • Full-text coverage in Espacenet
    • 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
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • BG - Federated Register Service
            • GB - Federated Register Service
            • NL - Federated Register Service
            • MK - Federated Register Service
            • ES - Federated Register Service
            • GR - Federated Register Service
            • SK - Federated Register Service
            • FR - Federated Register Service
            • MT - Federated Register Service
          • Register events
      • European Patent Bulletin
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Download Bulletin
        • EP Bulletin search
        • Help
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Searching Asian documents
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Patent insight reports
    • Data
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 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)
          • Go back
          • EBD files (weekly download) - free of charge
            • Go back
            • Secure EBD ST.36 files (weekly download) - for national patent offices only
        • Boards of Appeal decisions
        • EP full-text data for text analytics
      • Web services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • European Publication Server
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
        • Go back
        • Weekly updates
        • Updated regularly
    • Helpful resources
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • First time here? Patent information explained.
        • 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
          • Unitary Patent Guide
          • Main features
          • Applying for a Unitary Patent
          • Cost of a Unitary Patent
          • Translation and compensation
          • Start date
        • 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
        • Online Filing 2.0 pilot
        • MyEPO Portfolio - pilot phase
        • Online Filing 2.0 pilot continuation
        • Exchange data with us using an API
      • Get access
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Installation and activation
      • Find a professional representative
      • File with us
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • What if our online filing services are down?
        • Release notes
      • Interact on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
      • Tutorials
    • 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
      • Request for examination
  • 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
      • EPC Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • PCT-EPO Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Guidelines revision cycle
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Unitary Patent system
      • 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
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the finalists
      • Nominations
      • Watch the 2023 ceremony
      • European Inventor Network
        • Go back
        • Activities granted in 2023
    • 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
      • Firefighting technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Detection and prevention of fires
        • Fire extinguishing
        • Protective equipment
        • Post-fire restoration
      • Green tech in focus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About green tech
        • Renewable energies
        • Energy transition technologies
        • Building a greener future
      • CodeFest on Green Plastics
      • Clean energy technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Renewable energy
        • Carbon-intensive industries
        • Energy storage and other enabling technologies
      • IP and youth
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • 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
      • 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
        • Patents and standards
        • Artificial intelligence
        • Fourth Industrial Revolution
      • Additive manufacturing
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About AM
        • AM innovation
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast
  • Learning
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • European Patent Academy
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Learning activities
      • Learning Paths
    • Professional hub
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • EQE - European Qualifying Examination
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
        • Candidates successful in the European qualifying examination
        • Compendium
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Pre-examination
          • Paper A
          • Paper B
          • Paper C
          • Paper D
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patent enforcement in Europe
        • Patent litigation in Europe
    • 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
        • Inventors' handbook
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Introduction
          • Disclosure and confidentiality
          • Novelty and prior art
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Is the idea ‘obvious’?
            • Prior art searching
            • Professional patent searching
            • Simple Espacenet searching
            • What is prior art?
            • Why is novelty important?
          • Competition and market potential
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Research guidelines
          • Assessing the risk ahead
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Exploitation routes
            • Significant commercial potential
            • Significant novelty
            • What about you?
            • What if your idea is not novel but does have commercial potential?
          • Proving the invention
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Help with design or redesign
            • Prototype strategy
          • Protecting your idea
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Forms of IPR
            • Patenting strategy
            • The patenting process
          • Building a team and seeking funding
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Building a team
            • Sources of funding
            • Sources of help for invention
          • Business planning
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Constructing a business plan
            • Keep it short!
          • Finding and approaching companies
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • First contact
            • Meetings
          • Dealing with companies
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Advance or guaranteed payment
            • Companies and your prototype
            • Full agreement – and beyond
            • Negotiating a licensing agreement
            • Reaching agreement
            • Royalties
        • 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
          • For IP professionals
          • For business decision-makers
          • For stakeholders of the innovation ecosystem
        • IP clinics
      • EQE Candidates
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Coffee-break questions
        • Daily D questions
        • European qualifying examination - Guide for preparation
      • 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
        • Academic Research Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Completed research projects
          • Current research projects
        • 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
        • IP Teaching Kit
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Download modules
        • Intellectual property course design manual
  • About us
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • 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
    • Governance
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • 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
      • Towards a New Normal
      • Data protection & privacy notice
    • Leadership & management
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the President
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Procurement
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • About eTendering
      • Procurement portal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • e-Signing contracts
      • Invoicing
      • 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
        • Statistics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
      • 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
      • 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
    • Statistics and trends
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • Social responsibility
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Environment
      • Art collection
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • The collection
        • Let's talk about art
        • Artists
        • Media library
        • What's on
        • Publications
        • Contact
    • History
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Transparency portal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • General
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • 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
  • Boards of Appeal
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Decisions of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Recent decisions
      • Selected decisions
    • Procedure
    • Annual reports
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Organisation
      • 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
        • Composition of the Presidium
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Archive
    • Code of Conduct
    • Business distribution scheme
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technical boards of appeal by IPC in 2023
      • Archive
    • Annual list of cases
    • Communications
    • Publications
    • Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Archive
    • Case Law from the Contracting States to the EPC
    • Oral proceedings
  • Service & support
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • FAQ
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
    • Ordering
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 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
      • Legal resources
      • Directories of patent attorneys
      • Patent databases, registers and gazettes
      • Disclaimer
    • Contact us
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Filing options
      • Locations
      • Specific contact
      • Surveys
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Search services
        • Examination services, final actions and publication
        • Opposition services
        • Patent filings
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Detailed methodology
          • Archive
        • Online Services
        • Patent information
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Innovation process survey
        • Customer services
        • Filing services
        • Website
        • Survey on electronic invoicing
        • Companies innovating in clean and sustainable technologies
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Forums
    • Glossary
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2023 decisions
  • 2022 decisions
  • 2021 decisions
https://www.epo.org/en/node/t071624eu1
  1. Home
  2. T 1624/07 (Integrin alpha 11/CARTELA) 26-11-2008
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

T 1624/07 (Integrin alpha 11/CARTELA) 26-11-2008

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T162407.20081126
Date of decision
26 November 2008
Case number
T 1624/07
Petition for review of
-
Application number
00939232.5
IPC class
C07K 14/705
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD CHAIRMEN (C)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 54.35 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

An integrin heterodimer and an alpha subunit thereof

Applicant name
Cartela R & D AB
Opponent name
-
Board
3.3.04
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 54 1973
European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
Keywords
Main request claim 1 - novelty (yes), inventive step (yes)
Catchword
-
Cited decisions
T 0506/95
Citing decisions
-

I. This is an appeal against the examining division's decision to refuse the European patent application No. 00939232.5 pursuant to Article 97(1) EPC 1973. The application was filed as an international application under the PCT and published as WO 00/75187 with the title "An integrin heterodimer and an alpha subunit thereof".

II. Claims 1 and 22 to 25 of the published application read:

"1. A recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising essentially the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1, and homologues and fragments thereof.

22. A fragment of an integrin subunit alphall, which integrin subunit alphall comprises essentially the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID NO: 1, said fragment being a peptide chosen from the group comprising peptides of the cytoplasmic domain, the I-domain and the extracellular extension region.

23. A fragment according to claim 22, said fragment being a peptide from the cytoplasmic domain comprising essentially the amino acid sequence

KLGFFRSARRRREPGLDPTPKVLE.

24. A fragment according to claim 22, which is a peptide comprising essentially the amino acid sequence of the extracellular domain, from about amino acid No. 804 to about amino acid no. 826 of SEQ ID No. 1.

25. A fragment according to claim 22, which is a peptide comprising essentially the amino acid sequence of the I-domain, from about amino acid No. 159 to about amino acid no. 355 of SEQ ID No. 1."

III. Claim 1 of the main request before the examining division read as follows:

"1. A recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1, and fragments thereof, wherein the fragments are selected from the group consisting of

a peptide from the cytoplasmic domain comprising the amino acid sequence KLGFFRSARRRREPGLDPTPKVLE,

a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the extracellular domain, from amino acid no. 804 to amino acid no. 826 of SEQ ID No. 1, and

a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the I-domain, from amino acid no. 159 to amino acid no. 355 of SEQ ID No. 1."

The subject-matter of claims 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 19 and 22 related to a process of producing the product according to claim 1, to an isolated polynucleotide or oligonucleotide encoding the product of claim 1, to a vector comprising said polynucleotide or oligonucleotide, to a cell containing said vector, to a cell generated by process steps (a) to (c) of claim 6 and wherein the polynucleotide or oligonucleotide has been stably inserted into the cell genome, to a process of producing a recombinant integrin heterodimer, to a binding entity binding to the product of claim 1 and to the use of this entity to detect cells or tissues expressing an integrin subunit alpha11.

IV. The only reason given in the decision under appeal for the refusal of the application was that the subject-matter of claims 1, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 15, 19 and 22 lacked an inventive step. The examining division was of the opinion that document D1 was the closest prior art (bibliographic data see below in point VII) and not document D2 (bibliographic data see below in point VII) because document D1 identified the clones A3321 and A33108 which were used by the inventors for the full-length cloning process of the nucleic acid encoding the claimed integrin. The examining division held that starting from document D1 the provision of the full-length clone could be achieved by routine methods.

V. The board sent a communication informing the appellant that claims 1, 8 and 13 of the main request before it (and which corresponded to the request refused by the examining division, see section III above) seemed to lack clarity. In particular it was noted that it was not clear whether the term "fragments thereof" referred to the expression "integrin subunit alpha11" or to the expression "SEQ ID No. 1".

VI. Oral proceedings before the board took place on 26 November 2008.

The board raised the question whether the subject-matter of claim 1 could be considered as novel over the disclosure of the protein alphamt in document D2 given the statement in the application on page 25, lines 32 to 37 that "[b]ased on similar SDS-PAGE migration patterns, similar behaviour under reducing conditions, association with beta1 integrin chain, and up-regulation during in vitro differentiation of human fetal myoblasts, the present data show that the alpha11 integrin is identical with alphamt." (emphasis added).

The appellant filed a new main and three auxiliary requests.

Claim 1, which is the only claim of the main request amended with respect to the previous main request, read:

"1. A recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1

or

fragments of the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1, wherein the fragments are selected from the group consisting of

a peptide from the cytoplasmic domain comprising the amino acid sequence KLGFFRSARRRREPGLDPTPKVLE

a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the extracellular domain, from amino acid no. 804 to amino acid no. 826 of SEQ ID No. 1, and

a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the I-domain, from amino acid no. 159 to amino acid no. 355 of SEQ ID No. 1."

At the end of the oral proceedings the board announced its decision.

VII. The following documents are cited in this decision:

D1: International Journal of Cancer, vol. 66, 1996, pages 571-577, Genini, M. et al.

D2: Developmental Dynamics, vol. 204, 1995, pages 57-65, Gullberg, D. et al.

AD8: Molecular Biology of the Cell, vol. 8, September 1997, pages 1723-1734, Ziober, B.L. et al.

Sequence alignments of clone A3321 and clone A33108, respectively, with SEQ ID No. 1; submitted with the letter dated 15 December 2006

Declaration Dr Gullberg dated 5 April 2006

Second declaration Dr. Gullberg filed with letter dated 17 September 2007

Declaration Dr Velling dated 5 April 2006

Declaration Dr Johansson dated 17 September 2007

Declaration Dr Andersson dated 13 November 2006

VIII. The appellant's arguments in writing and at the oral proceedings, in so far as they are relevant to the present decision, may be summarised as follows:

Main Request

Articles 84 and 123(2) EPC

The amended claim 1 had a basis in the description as filed. Moreover, the claim was clear.

Novelty

The disclosure in Figure 3 of document D2 of a protein band in an SDS-gel termed "alphamt" did not destroy the novelty of the subject-matter of claim 1. Due to the lack of explicit sequence information, it was not derivable from document D2 whether alphamt comprised the sequence of SEQ ID No. 1. Moreover, even if it was assumed that this was so, the disclosure in document D2 was not novelty-destroying because it did not disclose the isolation of the protein in an enabling manner.

Inventive step

Document D2 was the closest prior art document since it related to the same purpose as the invention. The claimed alpha11 integrin could not be considered as obvious because its cloning could not be achieved by routine methods.

Main Request

Articles 84 and 123(2) EPC

1. Amended claim 1 of the main request relates to a "recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1" and to three specifically characterized "fragments of the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No 1.", i.e. a peptide from the cytoplasmic domain comprising the amino acid sequence KLGFFRSARRRREPGLDPTPKVLE, a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the extracellular domain, from amino acid no. 804 to amino acid no. 826 of SEQ ID No. 1, and a peptide comprising the amino acid sequence of the I-domain, from amino acid no. 159 to amino acid no. 355 of SEQ ID No. 1.

2. The embodiment in claim 1 of a "recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1" has a basis in claim 1 as filed (see section II above). A "peptide from the cytoplasmic domain comprising the amino acid sequence KLGFFRSARRRREPGLDPTPKVLE" is recited in claim 23 of the application as filed (see section II above) and an alignment with SEQ ID No. 1 demonstrates that it is indeed a fragment of SEQ ID No. 1. Fragments defined by the features by which the remaining two fragments of claim 1 are characterized are referred to in claims 24 and 25 of the application as filed.

The board has no objections pursuant to Article 84 EPC with regard to claim 1.

Therefore, claim 1 fulfils the requirements of Articles 84 and 123(2) EPC.

Novelty

3. Document D2 discloses an integrin alpha chain, designated "alphamt", which is upregulated in differentiated human fetal myotube cells compared to proliferating myoblast cells (page 58, first column, second full paragraph). The document inter alia reports about an immunodepletion assay with the myotube cells, anti-integrin chain beta1 antibodies and anti-integrin chain alpha1, alpha3, alpha4, alpha5 and alphav antibodies. For the assay the cells were iodinated and subsequently lysed to solubilise the proteins. Iodination of a protein indicates that it was located on the cell surface. The solubilised proteins were then first contacted with the anti-beta1 integrin chain antibody resulting in a fraction of proteins capable of forming dimers with the beta1 integrin chain. The obtained beta1-binding fraction was reacted with antibodies to alpha1, alpha3, alpha4, alpha5 and alphav integrin alpha chains thus precipitating the mentioned alpha chains from the fraction. The remaining fraction was reacted with the same set of antibodies for a more complete depletion of the mentioned alpha chains. Finally, the remaining extract was again contacted with the anti-beta1 integrin antibody, thus generating a precipitate containing all remaining proteins capable of binding to the integrin beta1 chain. The extracts of all the four precipitation rounds were loaded on an SDS gel and electrophoresis was performed. Figure 3 of document D2 presents the results of the immunodepletion assay. Lane d shows the separation of proteins present in the extract after the last precipitation step as disclosed above. Two distinct protein bands are visible, one being designated "alphamt" the other "beta1".

4. The present application cites the publication D2 as reference (38)(page 31 of the application). It is stated on page 4, lines 3 to 8 of the application that the cloning and further characterization of the protein "alphamt" disclosed in reference document (38), i.e. document D2 in the present proceedings, is the objective underlying the application. The following is furthermore stated on page 25: "Based on similar SDS-PAGE migration patterns, similar behaviour under reducing conditions, association with beta1 integrin chain, and upregulation during in vitro differentiation of human fetal myoblasts, the present data show that alphall integrin is identical with alphamt."

4.1 This latter statement has prompted the board to consider whether or not the protein named "alphamt" shown in lane d of Figure 3 (see point 3 above) falls under the definition in claim 1 of an "isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1" and therefore could be considered as novelty-destroying for the subject-matter of claim 1.

4.2 Document D2 does not explicitly disclose any nucleic sequence coding for or amino acid sequence of alphamt. Also the properties of alphamt reported in document D2 such as PAGE migration pattern, behaviour under reducing conditions, association with betal integrin chain, the developmental status or the relationship of alphamt to the protein class of alpha integrin chains do not per se convey any specific sequence information.

4.3 Furthermore, alphamt disclosed in document D2 and alpha11 of the present application were detected in different tissues from different human beings of a different developmental stage, i.e. the cell line in which alphamt was detected was derived from a clone originating from the thigh muscle of a 73-day-old aborted human foetus (page 62, second column), whereas the cDNA for alpha11 was isolated from adult human uterus cells (page 20 of the application).

4.4 The skilled person knows that the sequence of a gene encoding a particular protein may be subject to variation. Due to the degeneracy of the genetic code some of these nucleic acid variations do not cause any change in the amino acid sequence. Some however do, although they may remain silent with regard to the functional properties of the protein. Consequently, even two integrin molecules which might be considered to be "identical" on the basis of functional or physical parameters may be structurally different.

4.5 In particular with regard to integrins, a further degree of complexity is added by the alternative splicing of integrin-coding genes which may give rise to different integrin isoforms in the different tissues in which the gene is expressed and by the dependence of the expression of integrins on the developmental status of the cell (for example document AD8, page 1724, first column).

4.6 Thus, given these circumstances and seeing the different sources from which the integrin named "alphamt" in document D2 and the integrin named "alpha11" of the present application were obtained, a structural difference between the two compounds cannot be excluded. Or, in other words, on the evidence before the board it is not certain that the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID No. 1 is present in alphamt.

4.7 However, the novelty of claimed subject-matter is only affected by a prior art disclosure, if on the evidence on file, it is clear and unambiguous that the subject-matter disclosed in the prior art has all the features as the claimed subject-matter (Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 5th edition 2006, I,C.2.1, 10th paragraph and I.C.4.1.1(a), third paragraph).

4.8 Thus, while - as derivable from the application (see point 4 above) - a molecular biologist would consider the integrin alphamt and the integrin of the application to be identical, although a structural non-identity cannot be excluded, the board cannot come to such conclusion in view of the standards developed by the case law cited above.

4.9 Therefore, since there is no evidence that clearly and unambiguously establishes that alphamt has the specific feature of the subject-matter of claim 1 namely that it comprises "the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1", the protein alphamt shown in Figure 3 of document D2 cannot be considered as destroying the novelty of the subject-matter in claim 1 as far as it related to an "isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1."

4.10 Hence, the further issues of whether or not the protein in Figure 3 can be considered as an "isolated" integrin alpha chain and whether or not document D2 discloses an enabling isolation process for alphamt need not be addressed.

4.11 The board furthermore considers that document D2 does not disclose any specific fragments of the protein alphamt.

4.12 Therefore, in summary, the board concludes that the subject-matter of claim 1 is not anticipated by the disclosure in document D2.

5. Document D1 discloses cDNAs that are expressed in human primary myoblasts, but the expression of which is down-regulated in neoplastic counterpart cells, i.e. embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma cells. According to Table III and page 574, first column of document D1, the sequence of two of these cDNAs, A3321 having a length of 356 base pairs and A33108 having a length of 192 base pairs is partially identical with parts of the nucleic acid sequence encoding known integrins.

5.1 It is apparent from sequence alignments submitted by the appellant during examining proceedings that clone A3321 aligns with SEQ ID No. 1 of the present application at nucleic acid positions 298 to 642 (corresponding to amino acid positions 70 to 184) and that clone A33108 aligns with SEQ ID No. 1 at nucleic acid positions 1485 to 1717 (corresponding to amino acid positions 466 to 543; note added by the board: the number of base pairs of clone A33108 shown in the sequence alignment is slightly higher than that indicated for the clone with the same name in document D1). Thus, none of the proteins corresponding to the nucleic acid fragments A3321 and A33108 of document D1 has the characteristics by which the proteins in claim 1 are defined. This is also true with regard to the protein last-mentioned in the claim, i.e. a peptide comprising from amino acid 159 to 355 of SEQ ID No. 1, because clone A3321 only partly overlaps with this fragment.

5.2 Thus, the subject-matter of claim 1 is considered to be novel over the disclosure in document D1.

Inventive step

6. In assessing whether or not a claimed invention meets the requirements of Article 56 EPC the boards of appeal apply the "problem and solution approach" which requires as a first step the determination of the closest prior art with regard to the invention as presented in the description and the claims.

The closest prior art document

7. It has been held by the boards that, generally, the closest prior art document fulfils at least the criterion that it is directed to the same objective or purpose as the invention (Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 5th edition 2006, I.D.3.1 and 3.4, first and second paragraphs).

7.1 In general terms, the present application is related to an integrin beta1 chain-related integrin alpha chain protein.

7.2 The appellant considered document D2 and the examining division document D1 as the closest prior art document.

7.3 Document D1 has already been considered in the context of novelty (see points 5 and 5.1 above). It discloses the isolation of cDNAs related to 48 different genes which are expressed in human primary myoblasts (cell line A33) but not in embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma cells (cell line RD) (first paragraph of section "Results"). The aim of the study is to identify proteins which might play a role in tumour development (see for example the first sentence of the last paragraph of document D1).

7.4 In particular, document D1 discloses the two cDNA clones A3321 and A33108 (see also points 5 and 5.1 above) which according to Table III and page 574, first column of document D1 have 57% identity in their 356 base pairs in the region between residues 280 and 630 human integrin alpha-2 and 62.5% identity in their 192 base pairs between residues 1840 and 2030 of rat integrin alpha-1, respectively. It is suggested that the two cDNAs could represent parts of new isoforms of the two known integrin alpha subunits with which they are partially identical.

7.5 Document D2 discloses an integrin alpha chain termed "alphamt" and some of its properties, inter alia that it is associated with the beta1 chain of integrins (see point 3 above).

7.6 Thus, as to document D1, firstly, it relates to the elucidation of skeletal muscle tumour development.

7.7 Secondly, as stated in Dr Gullberg's and Dr Velling's declarations (points 9 and 10 and point 9, respectively), the two integrin-related cDNA clones disclosed in document D1 are very short (356 and 192 base pairs, respectively) when compared to the average full length integrin alpha sequences (around 4 to 7 kilo bases, see Dr Gullberg's second declaration, point 18) and the stated sequence identities to known integrins are relatively low (57% and 62.5%). Furthermore, as submitted by Dr Johansson in points 9 to 11 of his declaration, at the priority date of the application a scientist working in the field of integrin research would have anyhow doubted the existence of any new integrins due to "the sharp drop in the rate of discovery of new members in spite of improved knowledge, reagents and methods" and also due to "odd reports of "integrin-like" proteins/sequences from various sources". Therefore, in the board's view, the skilled person would have had doubts whether the full-length sequences related to the two clones A3321 and A33108 indeed encoded integrin alpha chains.

7.8 The fact that the sequences of A3321 and A33108 actually have a high percentage of sequence identity with parts of SEQ ID No. 1 of the present application (98.5% and 98.3%; see the title of the sequence alignments; see also point 5.1 above) was not known at the priority date of the application and could therefore not have been taken into account by the skilled person when interpreting the disclosure of document D1 (for example decision T 506/95, point 4.1, second paragraph of the reasons).

7.9 In contrast, document D2 relates to a specific integrin beta1 chain-related integrin alpha chain protein, i.e. to the same subject as the application.

7.10 Thus, not only for that reason, but also, in the board's view, since the skilled person would not have considered the speculative disclosure in document D1 (see point 7.7 above) as a promising starting point, the board considers that document D2 represents the closest prior art document.

Problem to be solved

8. According to the specification of the present application the problem to be solved would be the cloning and further characterization of the integrin alpha-chain disclosed in document D2 (page 4, lines 3 to 8 or page 19, lines 21 to 24).

9. However, this formulation of the problem needs qualification, since the board has come to the conclusion that on the evidence on file a structural identity between alphamt disclosed in document D2 and the claimed integrin, alpha11, cannot be unambiguously established (see points 4.2 to 4.9 above).

10. Given that the amino acid sequences of functionally identical proteins may differ (see point 4.4 above), the board considers that the objective technical problem underlying the application is the isolation of the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant thereof.

10.1 In the light of the data disclosed in the application, as for example the SDS-PAGE migration pattern, behaviour under reducing conditions, association with the beta1 integrin chain, and up-regulation during in vitro differentiation of human fetal myoblasts and given the corresponding data in document D2, the board is satisfied that the above stated problem is solved by the claimed subject-matter.

Obviousness

11. Document D2 suggests four methods for the isolation of alphamt in the paragraph bridging the two columns on page 61.

(a) isolation from fetal week 10 muscle myotubes;

(b) immuno-affinity purification from rat or mouse embryos with an anti-beta1 integrin antibody;

(c) immuno-affinity purification from G6 muscle cells with anti-alphamt antibodies;

(d) screening of a cDNA library from G6 myotubes.

12. In the board's view, prima facie, any one of these methods is to be regarded as a routine method which the skilled person might consider when attempting to isolate the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant thereof.

12.1 However, with regard to method (a) above, document D2 discloses that this method will present problems because of limited availability of the fetal week 10 muscle tissue (page 61, first column, last paragraph). Currently, there is no evidence before the board that the skilled person, in contrast to the authors of document D2, had a possibility to obtain sufficient quantities of that tissue for characterization and cloning a gene and the encoded protein.

12.2 With regard to method (b) mentioned above, document D2 discloses that "attempts to perform immunoaffinity purification on anti-beta1 integrin columns from rat or mouse embryos will also present problem [sic] since alphamtbeta1 has similar molecular weight as alpha2beta1 and alpha9beta1."(page 61, second column, second paragraph).

12.3 Moreover, with regard to method (c) it is indicated in document D2 that "initial attempts have generated muscle specific monoclonal antibodies but no antibodies reactive with alphamt"(page 61, second column, second paragraph).

12.4 Finally, with regard to the isolation by screening a cDNA library from G6 myotubes (method (d) above), it is stated in the present application on page 19, line 21 et seq.:

"In order to determine the nature of the integrin chain that we had previously characterized on human fetal muscle cells and named alphamt (38) a number of approaches were used. Applying PCR with mRNA from fetal muscle cells as template together with degenerate primers to conserved regions of integrin alpha subunits (43) we amplified cDNA for alpha1, alpha4, alpha5, alpha6 and alphav integrin chains (data not shown), but failed to amplify the novel integrin." (emphasis added).

12.5 The failure to isolate alphamt DNA from a cell line of fetal muscle cells is confirmed by Dr. Gullberg in the declaration dated 5 April 2006, point 16:

"16. [...]. Several attempts to isolate the gene using standard cloning techniques proved unsuccessful. For example, applying PCR with mRNA from human fetal muscle cells (myoblasts) as a template together with degenerate primers to conserved regions of known integrin alpha subunits failed to amplify the alpha-11 gene. In fact, we were never able to succeed in cloning the alpha-11 gene from a myoblast library."

12.6 Hence, on the evidence before it, the board concludes that the skilled person would not have been able isolate the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant thereof when relying on the screening of a cDNA library made from a cell line of fetal muscle cells.

12.7 For the board it follows from the observations in points 11 to 12.6 above that the skilled person would not have tried methods (a) to (c) above because, due to the limited availability of starting material (method (a)) or in view of the discouraging statements in document D2 itself (methods (b) and (c)), he/she would not have expected to succeed in isolating the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant thereof on their basis. In contrast, the skilled person would have tried method (d), but, as shown by the evidence on file, would have failed to isolate the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant with its help. Therefore, the board concludes that the subject-matter of claim 1 as far as it relates to an "isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1" cannot be considered as obvious on the light of any one of the methods disclosed in document D2.

13. A further question is whether or not the subject-matter of claim 1 is obvious in the light of a combination of document D2 with document D1.

13.1 Document D1 suggests that the full-length DNA related to clones A3321 and A33108 encodes isoforms of those known integrin alpha chains with which clones A3321 and A33108 are disclosed in document D1 to have partial sequence identity, i.e. integrins alpha1 and alpha2 (page 574, first column, first paragraph; (see point 7.4 above). In contrast, document D2 proposes that "alphamt" is an integrin which is not related to any of the known integrins, i.e. it is a considered as a "hitherto unidentified integrin alpha-chain on myotubes" (see the penultimate sentence of the abstract; see also the first paragraph of the section "Discussion"). Hence, in the board's view, the skilled person would not have seen any link between the two clones disclosed in document D1 and the integrin disclosed in document D2.

13.2 Moreover, the skilled person would have doubts whether the full-length sequences pertaining to clones A3321 and A33108 encoded integrin alpha chains at all (see point 7.7 above).

13.3 The potential usefulness of these two clones was not known to the skilled person at the priority date, because the high sequence identity of these clones with the sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1 turned only out later (see point 7.8 above).

13.4 Finally, in the board's view, an indication that the skilled person would not have considered that there is a relation between the clones A3321 and A33108 and the integrin chain disclosed in document D2 might be derived from the fact that a period of three years elapsed between the publication of document D1 and the priority date of the application which, as submitted by Dr Anderson, has to be considered as long because at that time integrin research was very competitive. Dr Andersson states in point 10 of his declaration:

"[I]ntegrin research has over the last 10-20 years been a very competitive field. Consequently, if it had been a routine, trivial task to identify new integrin subunits based on the information in the paper of Genini and co-workers (note added by the board: document D1), then it is very unlikely that it would have taken more than one year for someone in the in the field of integrin search to succeed. In fact, it took Gullberg and co-workers three years to do so, indicating that in practice the cloning of the integrin alpha-11 was not straightforward."

13.5 Therefore, in the board's judgement, the skilled person would not have used the two clones A3321 and A33108 disclosed in document D1 for the isolation of the integrin alpha chain disclosed in document D2 or a variant thereof.

13.6 Thus, the board concludes that the subject-matter of claim 1 as far as it relates to a "recombinant or isolated integrin subunit alpha11 comprising the amino acid sequence shown in SEQ ID No. 1" is not obvious in view of a combination of the disclosure in documents D2 and D1.

13.7 A fortiori, the conclusion reached in points 12.7 and 13.6 above applies to the provision of the peptide fragments of the amino acid sequence of SEQ ID No. 1 according to claim 1.

Procedural issues

14. The present decision deals with the patentability of claim 1 of the main request. An examination of the patentability of the remaining claims of this request is still needed.

Order

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance for further prosecution on the basis of the Requests filed at the oral proceedings.

Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • FAQ
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Ordering
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
SoMe facebook 0
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
SoMe instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
SoMe linkedIn
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
SoMe twitter
EPOorg
EPOjobs
SoMe youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility