T 0610/24 (Checking the chemical compatibility of pumps and chemicals/ECOLAB) of 16.12.2025
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2025:T061024.20251216
- Date of decision
- 16 December 2025
- Case number
- T 0610/24
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 19710517.4
- IPC class
- G06Q 10/10
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen (C)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- PUMP CHEMICAL COMPATIBILITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
- Applicant name
- Ecolab USA, Inc.
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.5.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 111(1)European Patent Convention Art 56Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011
- Keywords
- Inventive step - closest prior art (no Inventive step - different purpose) - ex post facto analysis
Remittal to the department of first instance - (yes - remittal for a search) - Catchword
- While it is not mandatory to start from the strictly closest prior art when arguing a lack of inventive step (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 11th edition, I.D.3.3), it is nevertheless recommended to start from prior art having a similar purpose and overall technical effect. Starting from a more remote document often leads to an ex post facto analysis, in particular to the formulation of a "hindsight problem" - a problem that the skilled person would not have realistically conceived. (See point 4.4 of the reasons)
- Cited cases
- G 0010/93
- 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 for further prosecution, including a search.