T 0035/20 (Double press to pay/APPLE) of 17.05.2024
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2024:T003520.20240517
- Date of decision
- 17 May 2024
- Case number
- T 0035/20
- Online on
- 31 March 2026
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 16703893.4
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- No distribution (D)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- USER INTERFACE FOR PAYMENTS
- Applicant name
- Apple Inc.
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.5.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 56
- Keywords
- Inventive step - double press on button with integrated fingerprint sensor to pay with phone
Inventive step - (yes
Inventive step - not a mere user requirement) - Catchword
- The term "user requirement" is often used when assessing the technicality of features of user interfaces. The Board understands the term to refer to needs and preferences defined by the end user of a system, who does not possess any technical understanding of the system. Under the Comvik approach (T 641/00 - Two identities/COMVIK), such user requirements may appear in the formulation of the technical problem as they do not make any technical contribution. It was confirmed in T 1463/11 - Universal merchant platform/CardinalCommerce that non-technical (user) requirements cannot normally specify any technical matter or be based on technical considerations. That is not to say that they cannot refer to the underlying technical system at all. Just like the technically skilled person, the user starts from the technical system of the prior art; user requirements do not appear in a vacuum. Thus, if the user uses software on a computer, he may formulate non-technical requirements relating to this software (see e.g. T 2019/12 - Angabe einer Order/Lacqua). Analogously, if, as in the present case, the system is a mobile phone, the user may formulate requirements relating to the use of the phone, as long as they do not involve technical considerations or require technical understanding.
(See point 8 of the reasons) - Citing cases
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the examining division with the order to grant a patent with the following claims and a description to be adapted:
Claims: 1 to 13 of the first auxiliary request filed with the statement of grounds of appeal.