European Patent Office

T 1234/17 (Customization based on physiological data/ADIDAS AG) of 04.03.2022

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T123417.20220304
Date of decision
4 March 2022
Case number
T 1234/17
Petition for review of
-
Application number
12196928.1
Language of proceedings
English
Distribution
Distributed to board chairmen and members (B)
OJ versions
No OJ links found
Other decisions for this case
-
Abstracts for this decision
-
Application title
Customization based on physiological data
Applicant name
Adidas AG
Opponent name
-
Board
3.5.01
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 56
Keywords
Inventive step - customisation of footwear are based on human gait (no
Inventive step - no technical features)
Inventive step - mapping acceleration data to human gait (no
Inventive step - not technical)
Catchword
However, the question is whether the mere idea of mapping this acceleration data to gait category is technical, involving any technical considerations or having any overall technical effect. This question arises in many inventions that involve mappings and algorithms.
In T 1798/13 (Forecasting the value of a structured financial product/SWISS REINSURANCE COMPANY LTD), points 2.7 to 2.9, the present Board essentially held that it was not enough that an algorithm makes use of a technical quantity in the form of a measured physical parameter (weather data). What matters is whether the algorithm reflects any additional technical considerations about the parameter, such as its measurement. In that case there were none. This was contrasted with T 2079/10 (Steuerung von zellulär aufgebauten Alarmsystemen/SWISSRE) where the invention was seen to lie in the improvement of the measurement technique itself, which involved technical considerations about the sensors and their positions.
Such a situation is conceivable in the present case, if the algorithm were to somehow enhance the input data using considerations of e.g. the placement of the sensors. However, the claim only specifies that the data "includes a time series of acceleration vectors" and that this data is "analyzed". There are no further details that could constitute technical considerations about the data or the sensors.
(See points 2.11 to 2.13 of the reasons)
Citing cases
T 1615/17T 1757/20

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is dismissed.