T 2043/23 (Resistance-based temperature monitoring/PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS) of 12.05.2026
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2026:T204323.20260512
- Date of decision
- 12 May 2026
- Case number
- T 2043/23
- Online on
- 22 July 2026
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 16711269.7
- IPC class
- A24F 40/53
- 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
- HEATER MANAGEMENT
- Applicant name
- Philip Morris Products S.A.
- Opponent name
- Imperial Tobacco Limited
- Board
- 3.5.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention Art 100(a)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011
- Keywords
- Application of G 1/24 - explanatory, non scope-altering, use of the description (yes - in line with G 1/24)
Inventive step - using measured heater's resistance at room temperature for further calculations (no
Inventive step - obvious)
Inventive step - monitoring whether the heater's resistance reaches a threshold value outside of an expected time period (yes
Inventive step - no hint in prior art) - Catchword
- [T]he Board notes that the present case differs from situations such as that in decision T 439/22 (reasons, points 2.4, 3.4 and 6), in which the description and drawings were relied upon to broaden the scope of a claim beyond what was conveyed by the claim wording read in isolation.
Here, by contrast, the description served an explanatory and confirmatory function by assisting the skilled reader in recognising an embodiment already encompassed by the claim wording, without altering the scope of the claim.
This modest explanatory and confirmatory use of the description is consistent with the principles set out in G 1/24 (see T 2027/23 - Turnable ladder/IVECO, reasons, point 3.5.2).
(See points 2.9 and 2.10 of the reasons) - Citing cases
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The opponent's appeal is dismissed.