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
      • File with us
      • Interact on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
      • Tutorials
    • Find a professional representative
    • 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
      • Guidelines
      • 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
      • 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
    • Governance
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
      • 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
      • Quality
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Overview
      • About the Observatory
      • Our activities
      • Our topics
      • Our partners and networks
      • Digital library
      • Data desk
    • 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
          • 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 web service
      • 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
      • 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
    • 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
        • 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
      • 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
      • 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
        • 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
  • 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
    • 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
        • 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
      • 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
        • Culture Space A&T 5-10
          • Go back
          • Catalyst lab & Deep vision
            • Go back
            • aqua_forensic
            • LIMINAL
            • MaterialLab
            • Perfect Sleep
            • Proof of Work
            • TerraPort
            • Unfinished Sculpture - Captives #1
            • Deep vision – immersive exhibition
          • The European Patent Journey
          • Sustaining life. Art in the climate emergency
          • Next generation statements
          • Open storage
          • Cosmic bar
        • Lange Nacht 2023
    • 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
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the Observatory
      • Our activities
      • Our topics
      • Our partners and networks
      • Digital library
      • Data desk
  • 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
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Forums
    • Glossary
    • RSS feeds
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisionsOverview

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2023 decisions
  • 2022 decisions
  • 2021 decisions
https://www.epo.org/en/node/t180261eu1
  1. Home
  2. T 0261/18 17-01-2023
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0261/18 17-01-2023

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2023:T026118.20230117
Date of decision
17 January 2023
Case number
T 0261/18
Petition for review of
-
Application number
04812972.0
IPC class
A61B 3/14
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 455.29 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

PATTERNED LASER TREATMENT OF THE RETINA

Applicant name

The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford

Junior University

Opponent name

Valon Lasers Oy

Carl Zeiss Meditec AG

Board
3.2.02
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 54
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)
European Patent Convention Art 123(2)
Keywords

Novelty - (yes)

Inventive step - (yes)

Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no)

Amendments - added subject-matter (no)

Interpretation of prior art documents - norms and standards

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
-
Citing decisions
-

I. Opponent 2 filed an appeal against the opposition division's decision to reject the opposition lodged by opponents 1 and 2 against the patent No. 1 701 651.

II. Oral proceedings took place on 17 January 2023 in the absence of opponent 1, who had been duly summoned to attend the oral proceedings.

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

IV. The respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed and that the patent be maintained as granted or, alternatively, on the basis of one of auxiliary requests 1 to 10, all filed with the reply to the statement of grounds of appeal.

V. The following documents are relevant to this decision.

D1 WO 01/37769

D4 WO 97/17011

D5 Feuerstein, M. et al., "Preselectable Intensity

Distribution in Large-Area Laser Coagulation by

Electronically Controlled Beam Deflection", SPIE,

Optical Instrumentation for Biomedical

Applications, Vol. 658, 1986

D6 EP 0 236 377 B1

D7 Dowler, Jonathan, "Laser management of diabetic

retinopathy", Journal of the Royal Society of

Medicine, Vol. 96, June 2003

D8 DIN EN 60601-2-22, December 1996

D9 US 2003/179344 A1

D10 JP 2001 149403 A

D10a English translation of D10

D12 EP 0 391 376 B1

D15 Davies, Nigel, "Alternating the pattern of

panretinal photocoagulation: could the visual

field for driving be preserved?" Eye, Royal

College of Ophthalmologists, Vol. 13, August 1999,

pages 531 to 536

D16 US 4,901,718

D17 US 2002/173778 A1

D18 L'Esperance Jr., Francis A., "Ophthalmic Lasers",

The C. V. Mosby Company, 1989

D20 US 4,887,019

VI. Claim 1 of the patent as granted (main request) reads as follows.

"1. A system for laser treatment of the retina of an eye of a patient, the system comprising:

an alignment source (411) producing an alignment beam, and

a laser source (413) producing a laser beam for providing doses of laser energy to at least two treatment locations on said retina and responsive to an operator action,

a scanner for moving the laser beam from one of said treatment locations to another of said treatment locations, for providing all of said doses of laser energy to said treatment locations substantially sequentially, and in less than about 1 second,

characterised in that the alignment beam provides a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots projected onto said retina,

wherein said treatment locations are spaced apart and are coincident with said separated spots and wherein said scanner moves the alignment beam from one of said separated spots to another of said separated spots."

VII. The appellant's arguments relevant to the decision can be summarised as follows.

Added subject-matter

Claim 1 covered an embodiment in which the alignment beam had the form of a multiple beam that provided the alignment pattern, comprising e.g. three spots. Figure 9 of the patent showed a multiple beam. According to the last feature of claim 1, this pattern would be moved from one of the separated spots to another. No such embodiment was disclosed in the original application documents, in which the alignment beam was in fact a single beam and the pattern was provided by the scanner moving this single beam.

Interpretation of the term "separated" used in claim 1

"Separated spots" were spots that were optically distinguishable but did not necessarily have to have a space between them.

Novelty in view of D9

D9 disclosed all the features of claim 1 of the main request (Figures 1 and 2a). In particular, Figure 9A showed a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of spots. Although the spots were abutting, they had to be considered separated. As mentioned in paragraphs [0026] and [0111], the patten of Figure 9A was variable. With the zoom optics 60 mentioned in paragraph [0122], it was possible to provide spaced-apart alignment spots as described in paragraph [0111] (page 6, left-hand column, lines 51 to 53).

It was implicitly disclosed that this pattern was projected onto the retina since an acousto-optical deflector 62 as described in paragraph [0111] for the therapeutic laser was also arranged in the optical path of the aiming laser 54 (Figure 1). Paragraph [0118] (first sentence) stated that both the therapeutic laser and the aiming laser were deflected by the same scanner.

Furthermore, the aiming laser 54 had the same spot size as the therapeutic laser since it was transmitted through the same optics. This could also be derived from Figures 3a and 3b and from paragraphs [0125] (page 8, left-hand column, lines 8 to 12) and [0009] (page 1, right-hand column, lines 6 to 11).

Novelty in view of D10

D10 disclosed (Figures 2 and 5) a treatment system comprising a therapeutic laser beam and an aiming laser beam. Both beams were deflected by the same scanner onto the retina (Figure 2 showing the treatment laser 10, aiming laser 19 and scanner comprised of mirrors 37, 38 with drives 37a, 38a; paragraphs [0016] to [0019] of D10a).

The fact that D10 aimed at treating a uniform coagulation spot (paragraph [0039]) did not mean that D10 did not disclose separated spots. Moreover, the spot diameter could be changed by means of the aperture 23 and the zoom lens 25 (paragraphs [0018] and [0019]). Hence, instead of the contour shown in Figure 5a, the system of D10 could provide a pattern with distinguishable spots.

Therefore, the subject-matter of claim 1 lacked novelty over D10.

Common general knowledge as exemplified in D8 or D18

D8 was a standard for medical devices and implicitly disclosed (or at least rendered it obvious) that for every treatment location there had to be a corresponding spot of the aiming beam (section 59.101).

D18 taught that to treat diabetic retinopathy a grid pattern of coagulation spots had to be provided on the retina (Figure 12-60). It was described that these spots were treated by a single laser shot.

Inventive step starting from D5 or D6

D5 and D6 disclosed coagulation of a pattern of separated treatment locations (D5: Figures 5a and 6a; D6: column 5, lines 24 to 31 and 54 to 58). The therapeutic beam was deflected by a scanner in combination with a fast shutter (D6: column 5, lines 25 to 31). Both documents mentioned a target beam that was coincident with the therapeutic beam (D5: page 87, first paragraph; D6: column 5, lines 32 to 42). However, D5 did not disclose that the alignment beam was guided through the fast shutter. Hence, D5 did not disclose an alignment pattern coincident with the treatment pattern that was projected by the aiming beam.

The standard D8 for medical laser equipment (point 59.101) required the treatment location of the therapeutic laser to be visibly indicated. The person skilled in the art would seek to provide an apparatus that conformed to this standard. Hence, it was obvious for the person skilled in the art to couple an aiming beam into the optical path of the therapeutic laser of D5 and to project an alignment pattern of separated spots that were coincident with the treatment locations. The chopper would be arranged such that both the treatment beam and the aiming beam would be guided through it.

D6 disclosed that the target beam had to be flush with the treatment beam. Hence, the person skilled in the art would arrange the fast shutter in D5 such that the target beam could project the alignment pattern.

Conversely, the teaching of D5 would motivate the person skilled in the art to modify the apparatus of D6 such as to arrive at the subject-matter of claim 1.

Moreover, the teaching of D7 would prompt the person skilled in the art to adjust the pattern of D5 to the grid structure of Figure 2.

Inventive step starting from D10

The apparatus of D10 allowed the treatment pattern to be adjusted. Hence, instead of coagulating a complete area it was possible to coagulate a grid of separate treatment locations as shown in D7 (Figure 2) or mentioned in D6 (column 5, lines 25 to 31). When attempting to comply with the standard of D8, the person skilled in the art would project a visible alignment pattern coincident with the treatment pattern on the retina.

Thus, combining the teaching of D10 with the common general knowledge (exemplified by D18 and D8) or with the teaching of D7 or D6 rendered the subject-matter of claim 1 obvious.

Inventive step starting from D7

D7 related to the treatment of diabetic retinopathy by manually applying individual laser beam spots. The treatment locations were arranged in a pattern defining a grid structure (Figure 2).

Starting from this document, the objective technical problem to be solved was to perform this treatment more quickly and accurately. To solve this problem, the person skilled in the art would envisage an automated scanning of the grid structure.

D10 or D9 disclosed the automated scanning of a treatment pattern. It would be obvious for the person skilled in the art to adjust the scanners of D10 or D9 to provide the grid structure of Figure 2 of D7.

Hence, combining the teaching of D7 with that of D10 or D9 would result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

The device of D6 was configured to provide the grid structure of Figure 2 of D7. It would be obvious for the person skilled in the art seeking to comply with the standard of D8 to guide the target beam such that it was coincident with the treatment beam. This would result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

Inventive step starting from D1

D1 related to a laser treatment device in which a treatment laser was superposed with an aiming laser. A pattern of treatment locations on the retina was provided by dividing the beams into plural sub-beams using a diffraction grating 36 (page 6, first paragraph, Figure 1).

Starting from this teaching, the objective technical problem would be to reduce the power required for the treatment laser. D9 taught that with a scanning approach the whole energy of the laser beam was available for every single spot. Hence, the teaching of D9 prompted the person skilled in the art to replace the diffraction grating of the device in D1 with a scanner and to control the scanner to provide the pattern of spots.

Thus, the subject-matter of claim 1 was rendered obvious by the combination of D1 with D9.

Inventive step starting from D15

D15 related to panretinal photocoagulation patterns and disclosed that in usual patterns the burns were spaced apart. However, D15 was silent about any technical implementation of this treatment. Both the devices of D10 and D9 were adapted to coagulate a grid structure of separated treatment locations. It was obvious for the person skilled in the art to adjust the devices accordingly.

Thus, the subject-matter of claim 1 was rendered obvious by the combination of D15 with D10 or D9.

Referral of a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

The appellant requested that questions be referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal about whether a prior art document concerning a medical device for the therapeutic treatment of the human body had to be interpreted such that it complied with standards for protecting patients which had been published subsequently. The appellant provided these questions orally as well as in writing in German, and the respondent received a translation of the written version by the interpreters during the oral proceedings. The German version of the questions reads as follows:

"Ist bei der Auslegung eines Dokumentes, das ein medizinisches Gerät betrifft, welches am Menschen therapeutisch eingesetzt werden soll, für den Fachmann eine Einhaltung von Normen, die dem Schutz von Patienten dienen, zwingend zu berücksichtigen?

Falls die Frage davon abhängt, in welcher zeitlichen Reihenfolge das Dokument und die Norm publiziert sind, ist die Auslegung zwingend für den Fall, dass die Norm nach dem Dokument publiziert wurde?"

The appellant argued that compliance with standards was essential for medical devices since such devices had to be approved by authorities. The question to be referred had not yet been the subject of any G-decision. Hence, the referral was justified.

VIII. The respondent's arguments relevant to the decision can be summarised as follows.

Added subject-matter

Due to the use of the singular, the expression "the alignment beam" in claim 1 could not be regarded as encompassing multiple beams. This was also in line with the wording "said scanner moves the alignment beam from one of said separated spots to another of said separated spots". Multi-beam implementations were not covered by the invention, as mentioned in paragraph [0034] of the description with regard to the embodiment of Figure 9.

Furthermore, the appellant's interpretation that the alignment beam provided the alignment pattern in the form of a multi-beam having three spots was incompatible with the requirement that the scanner moved the alignment beam from one of the spots to another. Therefore, this interpretation should be ruled out as it did not make technical sense.

Rather, it was clear from the claim that the alignment beam was a single beam that produced the pattern by means of the scanner moving the beam from one spot to another. Hence, the combination of the alignment beam and the scanner provided the pattern.

Consequently, claim 1 did not include added subject-matter.

Interpretation of the term "separated" used in claim 1

All the embodiments of the patent disclosed separated spots, i.e. spots which were physically disconnected or spaced apart. Furthermore, it was clear to the person skilled in the art that all the spots had to be separated. Since the spaced-apart treatment locations had to be coincident with the aiming spots, the aiming spots had to be separated.

Novelty in view of D9

D9 was concerned with applying an array of adjacent and overlapping treatment spots to a single location or spot on the retina so that these adjacent or overlapping spots effectively completely covered this single treatment location. D9 did not disclose separated spots in which a scanner moved an alignment beam from one of the separated spots to another of the separated spots, as required by claim 1.

Figure 9a showed the treatment beam 52, not an aiming beam. The component 62 in the aiming beam path was for pulsing purposes. D9 did not disclose that one and the same scanner was used to deflect the treatment beam and the aiming beam.

Novelty in view of D10

D10 failed to disclose a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots. In addition, the apparatus of D10 did not project an alignment spot for each treatment location onto the retina, but only the contour shown in Figure 5a.

Hence, the subject-matter of claim 1 does not lack novelty in view of D10.

Common general knowledge as exemplified in D8 or D18

The standard referred to in D8 did not imply that there had to be an alignment spot for every treatment spot.

D18 disclosed manual spot-by-spot placement of coagulation spots. The grid shown in Figure 12-60 was not a template.

Inventive step starting from D5 or D6

D5 and D6 did not disclose a scanner for projecting a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots onto the retina. Figure 6a was merely showing the treatment locations, not a visual alignment pattern.

The aiming requirement referred to in the standard D8 could be realised by an aiming laser generally targeting the treatment area.

Since D7 did not disclose a visual alignment pattern either, the combination of D5 with D7 would not lead to the subject-matter of claim 1. The same applied to the combination of D5 with D6 and vice versa.

Inventive step starting from D10

D10 was concerned with uniform confluent coagulation and provided for the scanning of the contour of a laser irradiation region by an aiming beam.

Neither the common general knowledge nor the teaching of D7 would motivate the person skilled in the art to adapt the system of D10 to arrive at a system according to claim 1.

D6 did not disclose or suggest using the target light beam for providing an alignment pattern.

Inventive step starting from D7

D7 disclosed individual treatment spots which were manually applied by a physician. There was no template or other arrangement for the spots.

D10 and D9 did not address the problem solved by the subject-matter of claim 1. The person skilled in the art would have no motivation to combine these documents in order to provide a visual alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots projected onto the retina.

D6 taught providing an outline of an area to be irradiated which was projected by a target light beam onto the retina. This outline area was then filled with the scan of the working beam. The treatment locations were neither spaced apart nor coincident with separated alignment spots.

Hence, combining D7 with any of D10, D9 and D6 did not result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

Inventive step starting from D1

D1 related to the multi treatment beam which had already been discussed in the patent. D9 was concerned with microphotocoagulation.

There were a considerable number of steps required in order to modify D1 to incorporate features of D9 and end up with the combination of features of claim 1.

Inventive step starting from D15

D15 taught that a spacing was required between the treatment locations. Since neither D10 nor D9 disclosed separated treatment locations - and even less so a visual alignment pattern comprising separated spots - the person skilled in the art would not envisage combining D15 with D10 or D9.

Referral of a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

The referral of the question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal was neither justified nor necessary. It did not concern a point of law of fundamental importance but rather an assessment which depended on the factual circumstances of each individual case, in particular with regard to whether a certain standard had to be complied with and, if so, which one that would be. A lack of case law by the Enlarged Board of Appeal on a certain issue was not a sufficient reason for a referral. Moreover, the question to be referred was not decisive for the case in hand.

1. The patent

1.1 The patent relates to laser treatment of the retina, i.e. for the treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy, a diabetes complication that is caused by damage to the blood vessels of the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye. Panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) is the current standard of care for proliferative diabetic retinopathy. During the procedure, the areas of the retina away from the macula are treated with scattered laser burns.

Retinal photocoagulation is typically performed point-by-point, where each individual dose is positioned and delivered by the laser. The system of the patent uses a scanner to move the laser beam from one treatment location to another.

1.2 The system according to claim 1, as shown in Figure 4, comprises:

- an alignment source 411 producing an alignment beam

- a laser source 413 producing a laser beam for providing doses of laser energy to at least two treatment locations on said retina and responsive to an operator action

- a scanner for moving the laser beam from one of said treatment locations to another of said treatment locations.

All of said doses of laser energy are provided substantially sequentially to said treatment locations, and in less than about 1 second.

The alignment beam provides a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots projected onto said retina.

The treatment locations are spaced apart and are coincident with said separated spots of the alignment beam, and the scanner moves the alignment beam from one of said separated spots to another of said separated spots.

1.3 Since the non-visible beam of the treatment laser is aligned with the visible alignment beam, the treatment locations can be determined on the retina. By delivering all the doses of laser energy in less than 1 second, the requirement for retinal tracking is eliminated.

2. Added subject-matter

2.1 According to the claims as originally filed, the system comprised an alignment subsystem providing a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separate spots projected onto said retina (claim 1), and the alignment subsystem comprised an alignment source (claim 2) and a scanner (claim 21).

Claim 1 as granted recites that the alignment beam itself "provides" an alignment pattern. In the opponent's view, this amendment infringed Article 123(2) EPC as the subject-matter of claim 1 as granted encompassed an alignment beam that was divided into multiple sub-beams, and the separated spots of the alignment pattern were projected by this multiple beam, while the scanner was not involved at all.

2.2 The Board considers that, taken in isolation, the feature "the alignment beam provides a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots" could be implemented by a single beam or a multiple beam. However, the feature "said scanner moves the alignment beam from one of said separated spots to another of said separated spots" cannot be carried out by a multiple beam. The appellant's interpretation according to which the pattern is created by a triplet beam that was moved by the scanner is illogical and does not make technical sense. If the separated spots are only created by the triplet beam, the (triplet) beam cannot be moved from "one spot" of the pattern to "another spot" of the pattern. Hence, such an embodiment does not fall under the subject-matter of the claim.

Contrary to the appellant's view, its interpretation is not supported by Figure 9 either. It is true that this figure shows a multi-beam laser. During examination, however, the passage referring to said drawing (paragraph [0034]) was amended to bring the description in line with the amended claims and now clearly indicates that the arrangement shown in Figure 9 is "not part of the invention".

2.3 Therefore, claim 1 does not include added subject-matter.

3. Interpretation of the term "separated" used in claim 1

The term "separated spots", in its normal meaning as understood by the person skilled in the art, means that the spots are physically disconnected or spaced apart. This is also in accordance with what is shown in the embodiments (Figures 6a to 6h). Hence, contrary to the appellant's view, a pattern with abutting or overlapping spots cannot be regarded as a "pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots".

4. Novelty in view of D9

4.1 D9 discloses a laser system for microphotocoagulation of the retina. It is undisputed that the system comprises the features of the preamble of claim 1 as granted (Figure 1 showing two laser sources 52, 54 and an acousto-optic modulator 62; paragraph [0111] mentioning an acousto-optic deflector as an alternative to the acousto-optic modulator 62). It is mentioned in paragraphs [0114] and [0116] that one of the laser sources (the laser source 54) can have a wavelength in the visible range (630-670 nm) for aiming purposes. Figure 9a shows a two-dimensional pattern of spots. This grid of 10 by 10 spots, or an alternative pattern, is scanned by the therapeutic beam, which is deflected by the acousto-optic deflector according to one embodiment of the device of D9 (paragraphs [0026] and [0111], Figure 1).

4.2 However, D9 does not disclose that the scanner for moving the beam of the therapeutic laser 52, i.e. the acousto-optic deflector arranged in the optical path of the laser 52, also moves the alignment beam, i.e. the beam of the aiming laser 54, from one of the spots to another. Figure 9a, showing the movement of the beam 52 to the different treatment locations via the element 62, does not show the aiming beam 54. Figure 1 does not disclose the formation of the alignment pattern. Although it can be derived from paragraph [0118] (first sentence) that a two-dimensional acousto-optic modulator can act on both beams 52 and 54, this passage does not refer to the embodiment with the alignment pattern.

4.3 Furthermore, it is not disclosed that the grid shown in Figure 9a is actually projected as a visible alignment pattern by the aiming laser onto the retina. In paragraph [0111] it is mentioned that this grid and several other patterns can be programmed. Hence, the Board considers Figure 9a to be a mere schematic illustration of the pattern (non-filled circles) scanned by the therapeutic beam 52 (black circles).

4.4 Moreover, Figure 9a shows a pattern of touching spots with no spacing between them. Hence, D9 does not disclose a pattern of separated spots. Since D9 is directed to evenly covering a single treatment location with microspots, applying separated spots would not make sense.

4.5 Consequently, the subject-matter of claim 1 does not lack novelty in view of D9.

5. Novelty in view of D10/D10a

5.1 It is also undisputed that D10 discloses a laser treatment system having the features of the preamble of claim 1 (Figure 2 showing the treatment laser 10, aiming laser 19 and scanner comprised of mirrors 37, 38 with drives 37a, 38a; paragraphs [0016] to [0019] of D10a).

Figure 5a shows the contour of the irradiation region scanned by the aiming beam (paragraph [0027]). This contour is actually projected onto the retina. Figure 5b shows the scanning pattern of the treatment laser. By irradiating the small spots one after the other, the entire irradiation region becomes coagulated (paragraph [0028]).

5.2 However, the abutting hexagonal spots forming the contour in Figure 5a cannot be regarded as separated spots of a visible alignment pattern. D10 only mentions the contour which is projected. Furthermore, it is clear that to fulfil the purpose of the system of D10, namely treating a uniform coagulation spot (paragraph [0039] of D10a), it is not necessary to project individual spots of the contour onto the retina. Hence, it is irrelevant whether it is possible to change the spot size of the laser beam since D10 does not provide a disclosure of an alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots or indicate that the system would be suitable to provide said separated spots.

5.3 Consequently, the subject-matter of claim 1 does not lack novelty in view of D10.

6. Inventive step starting from D5 or D6

6.1 D5 and D6 both relate to applying a small low-energy beam that is scanned over a larger treatment area to completely coagulate that area (D5: Figures 5a and 6a; D6: column 1, line 57 to column 2, line 22).

Figure 8a of D5 shows a ring-shaped illumination by the aiming beam. Figure 6a shows a pattern of separated treatment locations. This pattern is not projected by an alignment beam onto the retina.

D6 discloses a target light source producing a target light beam that surrounds the area to be treated by the working light beam (column 5, line 53 to column 6, line 8).

Hence, neither D5 nor D6 discloses projecting a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots.

6.2 The common general knowledge exemplified by the standard disclosed in D8 does not motivate the person skilled in the art to project an alignment pattern of spaced-apart spots by an alignment beam onto the retina.

The Board agrees with the appellant that the standard of D8 requires the treatment location of any therapeutic laser to be visibly indicated (section 59.101). However, to comply with the standard of D8 it is not necessary to visibly indicate every single treatment spot. Hence, D8 does not disclose or suggest using the scanner of the therapeutic laser of D5 or D6 to project an alignment pattern of separated spots which are coincident with the treatment locations.

6.3 As mentioned before, neither D5 nor D6 discloses a visible alignment pattern comprising a plurality of separated spots which are coincident with the treatment spots. In fact, D6 even teaches that instead of guiding the target beam and the treatment beam flush with each other, the target beam surrounds the beam spot of the treatment beam (column 5, lines 54 to 58). Thus, the combination of D5 with D6 or vice versa does not result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

6.4 D7 relates to the treatment of diabetic retinopathy by manually moving the treatment laser (page 277, left-hand column, last paragraph, Figure 2). Projecting a pattern of the spots to be coagulated onto the retina is neither taught nor suggested. Hence, combining D5 or D6 with D7 does not result in the claimed subject-matter either.

6.5 Consequently, the subject-matter of claim 1 does not lack an inventive step over the combination of D5 or D6 with any of D6, D5, D7 and the common general knowledge (D8).

7. Inventive step starting from D10

7.1 D10 is directed to coagulating a spot or an area on the retina with a small laser beam that scans a pattern of microspots to cover the entire area. For this purpose, there is no reason to project an alignment pattern with separated spots onto the retina. In D10, the treatment laser beam can be moved to another area manually. This further treatment area or its contour is indicated by the aiming beam.

7.2 Neither the common general knowledge (exemplified by D18 and D8) nor the teaching of D7 or D6 would prompt the person skilled in the art to use the scanner of D10 to project an alignment pattern of spaced-apart spots by an alignment beam onto the retina, to move the treatment laser beam from one of the spots/areas of the alignment pattern to at least one other spot/area and to fill it with microspots, and to do that still in less than 1 second.

7.3 Both D18 and D7 relate to the treatment of diabetic retinopathy by manually moving the treatment laser. The standard of D8 requires that the treatment location, rather than every single treatment spot, is indicated by a visible aiming beam. Projecting a pattern of the spots to be coagulated onto the retina is neither taught nor suggested.

D6 mentions projecting a pattern of treatment spots (column 5, lines 25 to 31). However, it cannot be derived that this pattern is projected by the target light beam mentioned in the subsequent paragraph, or that the treatment beam is then aligned with this pattern.

7.4 Thus, combining the teaching of D10 with that of D7 or D6 or with the common general knowledge does not render the subject-matter of claim 1 obvious.

8. Inventive step starting from D7

8.1 D7 relates to the treatment of diabetic retinopathy by applying individual laser beam spots manually (page 277, left-hand column, last paragraph, Figure 2). This is actually the procedure described in paragraph [0002] of the patent as prior art. D7 does not disclose a scanner for moving a laser beam and an alignment beam or projecting a visible alignment pattern comprising separated spots onto the retina by the alignment beam.

8.2 Since D9 and D10 do not disclose projecting a visible alignment pattern comprising separated spots (D9 does not disclose any projection of a pattern at all, and D10 does not disclose separated spots), combining D7 with any of D9 or D10 would not result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

8.3 D6 relates to scanning a treatment area with a small laser beam spot (column 1, line 57 to column 2, line 22). D6 discloses a target light source producing a target light beam that surrounds the area to be treated by the working light beam (column 5, line 53 to column 6, line 8). Hence, it teaches away from projecting an alignment pattern the spots of which are coincident with the treatment beam spots. The pattern mentioned in column 5, lines 25 to 31 is the treatment spot pattern. Hence, combining D7 with D6 would not result in the subject-matter of claim 1.

9. Inventive step starting from D1

9.1 D1 relates to a multiple treatment beam, i.e. a main laser beam that is divided into a multiplicity of sub-beams which are to be focused on the retina. Hence, multiple burns can be placed with one shot of the laser beam, thereby avoiding the drawbacks of the spot-by-spot technique.

9.2 D9 is concerned with microphotocoagulation and relates to the problem of individual spot quality on a particular area.

9.3 Since D1 and D9 relate to different techniques solving different problems, the person skilled in the art would not envisage combining these documents. The subject-matter of claim 1 is therefore inventive over this combination.

10. Inventive step starting from D15

10.1 D15 is a scientific paper relating to panretinal photocoagulation patterns. It discloses that in usual patterns the burns are spaced apart (page 531, right-hand column, penultimate paragraph, second sentence). However, D15 is silent about any projection of such a pattern onto the retina by an alignment beam.

10.2 Since neither D9 nor D10 discloses separated treatment locations - and even less so a visual alignment pattern comprising separated spots - the person skilled in the art would not envisage combining D15 with D10 or D9.

10.3 Hence, the subject-matter of claim 1 is not rendered obvious by the combination of D15 with D10 or D9.

11. Consequently, none of the objections raised by the appellant prejudices the maintenance of the patent as granted.

12. Referral of a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

12.1 Under Article 112(1)(a) EPC a Board of Appeal refers a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal if it considers that a decision is required in order to ensure uniform application of the law or because a point of law of fundamental importance arises. A Board can refer questions either of its own motion or following a request from a party.

Whether or not to refer a question is a discretionary decision by the Board (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 10th edition 2022, V.B.2.3.2). In order for a referral to be admissible, the referred question must be relevant for deciding the case in question (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 10th edition 2022, V.B.2.3.3).

12.2 The appellant requested that questions be referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal about whether a prior art document concerning a medical device for therapeutic treatment of the human body had to be interpreted such that it complied with norms serving the protection of patients which had been published subsequently.

12.3 In the case in hand, the documents in the context of which these questions were raised were prior art document D5 and the standard D8. As set out in point 6.2 above, the subject-matter of claim 1 would involve an inventive step even if, in line with the appellant's suggestion, it were accepted that the standard of D8 had to be complied with when interpreting D5 or implementing the device according to D5. Accordingly, the questions to be referred were not relevant for deciding the case.

In addition, the Board notes that norms and standards for medical devices are part of a regulatory framework which may vary locally (e.g. from country to country or from region to region) and change over time (e.g. becoming stricter or less strict, on the basis of considerations which may not be limited to patient interests). It may also be that a medical device described in a certain prior art document deliberately does not comply with a certain standard or norm. For these reasons, it would not be justified to consider that, as a matter of principle (i.e. detached from the circumstances of the individual case), the person skilled in the art always interprets prior art documents in a way that is compliant with any possibly applicable standard or norm (besides the fact that there may also be conflicting standards in different countries or regions).

12.4 In conclusion, the Board rejected the appellant's request to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is dismissed.

Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Forums
    • 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