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
      • Find a professional representative
      • File with us
      • Interact on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
      • Tutorials
    • 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
      • EPC Guidelines
      • PCT-EPO Guidelines
      • Guidelines revision cycle
      • 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
      • A glimpse of the planned activities
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states of the European Patent Organisation
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Governance
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Select Committee documents
      • 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
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • 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
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • BG - Federated Register Service
            • GB - Federated Register Service
            • NL - Federated Register Service
            • MK - Federated Register Service
            • ES - Federated Register Service
            • GR - Federated Register Service
            • SK - Federated Register Service
            • FR - Federated Register Service
            • MT - Federated Register Service
          • 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
      • 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
      • Find a professional representative
      • 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
  • 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
      • EPC Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • PCT-EPO Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Guidelines revision cycle
      • 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
        • IP clinics
      • 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
        • Academic Research Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Completed research projects
          • Current research projects
        • 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
        • 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
      • Overview
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • 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
      • 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
    • 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
  • 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
      • 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
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Forums
    • Glossary
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2023 decisions
  • 2022 decisions
  • 2021 decisions
https://www.epo.org/en/node/t980455eu1
  1. Home
  2. T 0455/98 (Crystalline sugar alcohols/SPI POLYOLS) 07-12-2001
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

T 0455/98 (Crystalline sugar alcohols/SPI POLYOLS) 07-12-2001

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T045598.20011207
Date of decision
07 December 2001
Case number
T 0455/98
Petition for review of
-
Application number
90312752.0
IPC class
A61K 9/18
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD CHAIRMEN (C)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 40.5 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

Crystalline sugar alcohol containing uniformly dispersed particulate pharmaceutical compound

Applicant name
SPI POLYLOS, Inc.
Opponent name
BASF Aktiengesellschaft Patente, Marken und Lizenzen
Board
3.3.02
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 52(1) 1973
European Patent Convention Art 54 1973
European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
European Patent Convention Art 84 1973
European Patent Convention Art 111(1) 1973
European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973
European Patent Convention Art 123(3) 1973
Keywords

Main request and auxiliary requests 2 to 5: novelty (no); citation (10) when interpreted in the light of the specific reference to citation (11) destroys the novelty of process claim 7

First auxiliary request: filed late, admissibility (yes); inventive step (no), additional feature in claim 7 result of routine experimentation of the skilled practitioner

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
T 0114/86
Citing decisions
J 0014/08
J 0013/11

I. The respondent is proprietor of European patent No. 0 435 450. The patent was granted with 10 claims pursuant to European patent application No. 90 312 572.0. The two independent claims as granted read as follows:

1. A pharmaceutical composition comprising crystalline sugar alcohol derived from at least one mono- or polysaccharide and having uniformly dispersed within the crystal matrix of the sugar alcohol particles of at least one pharmaceutically active compound.

7. A process for producing pharmaceutical compositions having uniformly dispersed particulate active which comprises the steps of

A) forming a molten sugar alcohol derived from at least one mono- or polysaccharide;

B) dispersing particles of at least one pharmaceutically active material in said molten alcohol under conditions such that a homogeneous mixture is formed;

C) cooling said homogeneous molten mixture while agitating until a viscous mass is formed; and

D) cooling said mass slowly to a point where said alcohols become fully crystallised."

Claims 2 to 6 are dependent claims, directed to elaborations of the composition according to claim 1. Dependent claims 8 to 10 relate to specific elaborations of the process according to claim 7.

II. The appellant filed opposition to the grant of the European patent requesting its revocation in full pursuant to Article 100(a) EPC on the grounds of lack of novelty and inventive step. These grounds for opposition were supported, inter alia, by the following citations:

(10) FR-A-2 629 822;

(11) US-A-4 252 794.

III. The opposition was rejected pursuant to Article 102(2) EPC by a decision of the opposition division posted on 5. March 1998. The essence of the reasoning in the decision to reject the opposition was as follows:

As to novelty, the opposition division found that none of the documents cited in the course of the opposition proceedings disclosed clearly and unambiguously the pharmaceutical composition according to claim 1 or the process according to claim 7 with all the technical features of these independent claims.

Concerning inventive step, the opposition division considered citation (10) to represent the closest state of the art. It found, however, that citation (10), even if it is was read in the context of citation (11), pointed the skilled reader neither to the possibility of using a pharmaceutically active compound as the active ingredient in the claimed composition nor to the problem of avoiding segregation or separation of the active particulate material from the excipient mass. Moreover, it estimated that step C) of the process according to claim 7 was neither disclosed in the cited documents nor obvious to a person skilled in the art trying to solve the problem of effectively preventing segregation of the dispersed particulate active material from the crystal matrix of the sugar alcohol so as to achieve uniform distribution of particles of a pharmaceutical material within the crystalline sugar alcohol matrix.

IV. An appeal was filed against the decision of the opposition division. Both the appellant (opponent) and the respondent (proprietor) requested oral proceedings.

V. In advance of the oral proceedings, scheduled for 7 December 2001, the respondent filed auxiliary requests 1. to 4 which became the second, third, fourth and fifth auxiliary requests as refiled during the oral proceedings before the board (see paragraph VI below). Each of the second, third and fourth auxiliary requests consists of an amended claim 1 and claims 2 to 10 as granted. The fifth auxiliary request consists of an amended claim 1 and claims 2 to 8 as granted (claims 9 and 10 being cancelled).

VI. In the introductory remarks at the oral proceedings, the chairman suggested that, for reasons of procedural economy, the patentability of process claim 7 be discussed first, since this claim was present in identical form in all requests on file at the beginning of the oral proceedings (see paragraphs I and V above). As a result of this discussion, the respondent filed towards the end of the oral proceedings a new first auxiliary request. This request consists of claims 1 to 10. as granted, step D) in claim 7 differing by the insertion of the words emphasised below: "cooling said mass slowly over a period of between about 6 and about 96. hours to a point where said alcohols become fully crystallised."

VII. The appellant's arguments submitted in writing and during oral proceedings can be summarised as follows:

Citation (10) disclosed a process for the preparation of a solid composition based on crystalline sorbitol having uniformly dispersed within the crystall matrix particles of one or more alkali phosphates. The express incorporation of the disclosure of citation (11) in document (10) had the effect that the teaching of the cited state of the art was prejudicial to the novelty of the process according to claim 7.

The opposition division was, in the appellant's opinion, incorrect in both its conclusions in the decision under appeal, namely that citation (10) did not refer to the use of a pharmaceutically active compound for dispersion within the crystalline sorbitol matrix and that the cited state of the art did not mention the technical features of step C) in claim 7. On the contrary, alkali phosphates were clearly covered by the term "pharmaceutically active compound" in its broad sense used in the patent in suit. Similarly, the process disclosed in citation (11) included clearly and unequivocally the step of simultaneously cooling and kneading the molten sorbitol until a plastic magma was obtained and this procedure corresponded exactly to what was actually claimed in step C).

The requirement of cooling the extrudate resulting from step C) slowly to achieve crystallisation of the sorbitol matrix was likewise anticipated by the disclosure in the cited state of the art. The procedural steps used in the process of claim 7 for cooling the viscous mass slowly to a point where the sorbitol becomes fully crystallised would be regarded by the skilled reader as clearly implied by the disclosure of citation (11).

The respondent's assertion that a uniform dispersion of the particulate material in the crystalline sorbitol matrix could not be achieved by the process disclosed in citation (10) was incorrect. On the contrary, what the respondent itself had demonstrated by the data provided in Table I of the patent in suit was nothing else than the finding that tablets produced by the claimed process contained in toto roughly the same amount of phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride as the active ingredient per one single tablet. The respondent's submission that these data showed the uniform dispersion of the active ingredient within the crystalline sugar alcohol matrix of the tablets was, however, a mere assertion which was in no way supported by the data presented in Table I.

VIII. The respondent disagreed and its arguments, in written submissions and during the oral proceedings, were in summary as follows:

The claimed invention was directed to the problem of achieving a uniform distribution of particles of a pharmaceutical material within a crystalline sugar alcohol matrix. From the description given in the background section of the patent in suit it would be appreciated that this problem was particularly acute with respect to pharmaceuticals in the form of fine powders because of the segregation problem encountered with prior processes. The claimed invention solved the problem by means of the process according to claim 7, in which the pharmaceutical particles were dispersed in molten sugar alcohol followed by cooling of the mixture with continuous agitation thereby forming a viscous mass in which the distribution was fixed so that full crystallisation could be carried out subsequently. This process lead, for the first time, to a composition as defined in claim 1 of the patent in suit.

Citation (10) was concerned with a solid composition based on sorbitol and phosphates for the manufacture of a freezing adjuvant for foodstuffs based on minced meat and was thus not relevant to the problem solved by the invention. This citation contained no reference at all to a pharmaceutical composition. Thus the skilled person, faced with the problem of producing pharmaceutical compositions having a uniform distribution of particles of a pharmaceutical material within the crystalline sugar alcohol matrix, had no reason to consider citation (10) as a relevant piece of prior art.

The appellant's combination of citations (10) and (11) to attack the patentability of the claimed process in the patent in suit was without foundation. The passage in (11) cited by the appellant, especially column 4, lines 30 to 45, described the procedure for producing a modified crystal form of sorbitol which was the precise subject-matter of the citation (11). There was no question of any other material being present in the process than sorbitol itself. There was a reference in (11) to the addition of compounding additives after the sorbitol product had been formed in the procedure described in (11).

In particular, there was no teaching at all in citation (11) concerning the slow cooling of the viscous mass to a point where the sugar alcohol matrix becomes fully crystallised.

Citation (10) suggested the use of the apparatus described in document (11) in order to process a sorbitol/phosphate mixture. But (10) suggested only that the mixture was extruded with this apparatus so that it exited from the outlet at a temperature of 85. C- 100 C whereupon crystallisation of the sorbitol occurred. No previous controlled partial crystallisation of the sorbitol was mentioned and no reference was made to the operating conditions of the process in (11). It could not be assumed therefore that anything comparable to step C) of claim 7 was taught by this reference in (10).

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

The respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed and that the patent be maintained either (main request) as granted or alternatively in accordance with one of the auxiliary requests filed during the oral proceedings.

1. The appeal is admissible.

Main request; auxiliary requests 2 to 5

2. As is apparent from paragraphs I and V above, process claim 7 is present in identical form in all sets of claims forming the main request and auxiliary requests 2. to 5.

3. As regards the assessment of novelty of the process according to claim 7, the board considers it appropriate to make first the following general remarks: When assessing novelty, the disclosure of a particular prior document must normally be considered in isolation; in other words it is only the actual content of a citation (as understood by a skilled man) which destroys novelty. It is not permissible to "combine" separate items of prior art together. However, according to established case law of the boards of appeal, when determining the meaning to the skilled man of a citation (hereinafter referred to as the "primary citation") which contains a specific reference to a second citation, all or part of the disclosure of the second citation may need to be considered as part of the disclosure of the "primary citation" (see eg "Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office", 3rd edition, 1998, I. C. 3.1, pp 70-71).

4. In the present case, step A) of the process according to claim 7 of the patent in suit comprises "forming a molten sugar alcohol derived from at least one mono- or polysaccharide". It has not been disputed throughoout the proceedings that the process for producing the solid composition of sorbitol and phosphates disclosed in citation (10) (ie the "primary citation") involves as the first step the provision of the desired quantity of sorbitol (ie a sugar alcohol derived from a polysaccharide) in the molten state (see eg page 2, lines 33 to 35).

5. Step B) of the claimed process requires "dispersing particles of at least one pharmaceutically active material in said molten alcohol under conditions such that a homogeneous mixture is formed" and corresponds thus exactly to what is described in the second step of the process disclosed in (10) as the provision of an intimate mixture of sorbitol and phosphates (see page 5, lines 14 to 15: "mélange intime de sorbitol et de phosphates").

5.1. The board cannot accept the respondent's argument that a difference is to be seen in the fact that, according to (10) phosphates are dispersed in the molten sorbitol, whereas the claimed process requires dispersion of a pharmaceutically active material in the matrix of the molten sugar alcohol. The term "pharmaceutically active material" is broadly defined in the patent in suit by reference to "an organic or inorganic orally ingestible compound which is taken for medicinal, dietary and/or nutritional purposes, and which is particulate in form. Illustrative of the pharmaceutically active compounds which may be beneficially formulated by the practice of the claimed invention are organic compounds such as aspirin, cimetidine, ibuprofen, aspartamine, atenolol, saccharine, acetaminophen, phenylpropanolamine hydrochloride and the like as well as inorganic compounds such as salts and oxides of alkali metals, alkaline earth metals and mineral supplements of iron, copper, zinc, and the like" (see patent specification, page 3, lines 25 to 30; claim 4 - emphasis added).

5.2. This broad definition of the pharmaceutically active material used for the dispersion in the molten matrix in the patent in suit clearly and unambiguously includes materials or compounds encompassed by the technical term "phosphates" used in (10). The board concurs with the appellant's submission during oral proceedings that the use of phosphates, inter alia, for pharmaceutical and nutritional purposes forms part of the common general knowledge of a person skilled in the art and indeed of many with no particular skill in the art. Thus, to mention only two well-known examples, the skilled person would know that dibasic sodium phosphate, used as an orally ingestible compound, is a particulate material which is taken for dietary and/or nutritional purposes as a sequestrant, emulsifier or buffer in foods, or for medicinal purposes as a cathartic and in veterinary medicine as a laxative; and that monobasic sodium phosphate is an orally ingestible compound which is taken for medicinal purposes as an urinary acidifier in veterinary medicine. Consequently, the reference to a pharmaceutically active material in step B) of the claimed process cannot be considered, contrary to the respondent's assertion and the opinion of the opposition division in the decision under appeal, as a distinguishing feature over the state of the art according to (10).

6. The homogeneous molten mixture resulting from the above-mentioned process step B) is subsequently subjected, in step (C) of the process according to claim 7, to an operation which is broadly defined as "cooling said homogeneous molten mixture while agitating until a viscous mass is formed".

6.1. The further processing of the molten intimate mixture of sorbitol and phosphates obtained in the above-mentioned second step of the process disclosed in (10) is referred to in the cited document as involving its extrusion under conditions such that said mixture is brought, at the outlet of the extrusion apparatus, to a temperature of 85 C to about 100 C, whereby crystallization of the sorbitol is effected (see page 5, lines 14 to 19). In the following paragraph it is, however, explicitly specified and explained that the aforementioned extrusion may be performed, for example, on the machines disclosed in US-A-3 618 902 to TELEDYNE INC. and that their application to the manufacture of powdered sorbitol (emphasis added) has been disclosed in US-A-4 252 794 to I.C.I. [ie citation (11), the second citation]; in the following passage it is explicitly stated that the text of the those patents is incorporated in citation (10) by reference (see (10), especially page 5, lines 20 to 26).

6.2. Consequently, on the proper construction of citation (10) (ie the "primary citation"), the procedural steps and operating conditions used in the second citation (11) for the manufacture of powdered, crystalline sorbitol and their application for further processing the molten sorbitol/phosphate mixture into the final solid composition of crystalline sorbitol and phosphates have been incorporated by reference into the disclosure of citation (10) (see point 3 above). Furthermore, the successive procedural steps and operating conditions described in (11) (see especially column 3, line 64 to column 4, line 45) for the manufacture of powdered, crystalline sorbitol are exactly those suitable to prepare the compositions according to claim 7 of the patent in suit (see patent specification, especially page 4, line 42 to page 5, line 7). This identity of the successive procedural steps and operating conditions in the patent in suit and in citation (11) is clearly very relevant to the actual scope of the disclosure of (10) in relation to those features of present claim 7 which are not explicitly and specifically mentioned in citation (10), but incorporated therein by reference.

6.3. The relevant method in citation (11) involves the steps of "continuously introducing a feed comprising molten sorbitol into an elongated mixing zone having shaft means and a plurality of kneader blades mounted on the shaft means, the configuration of the kneader blades being such as to provide restricted clearances between the blades and the adjacent walls; simultaneously cooling and kneading the molten sorbitol as it passes through the mixing zone until a plastic magma of molten sorbitol and a substantial portion of gamma-sorbitol crystals is obtained and continuously discharging the blend from the mixing zone through an extrusion orifice" (see especially column 4, lines 32 to 41). If this disclosure is compared with that starting from the penultimate line on page 4 to line 6 on page 5 of the patent in suit, it becomes unambiguously clear that the above-mentioned successive procedural steps and operating conditions disclosed in citation (11) and incorporated by reference into the disclosure of (10) correspond exactly to those which are used in the patent in suit and which are shortly referred to in step C) of claim 7, as "cooling said homogeneous mixture while agitating until a viscous mass is formed".

The term "viscous mass" used in the patent in suit for the product which is discharged from the extruder and the term "plastic magma" used in (11) (see column 4, lines 39 to 40) would be considered by the skilled person as synonyms which designate the same physical state of the extrudate. Both, the "viscous mass" in the patent in suit (see especially page 4, lines 19 to 22) and the "plastic magma" in (11) (see especially column 4, lines 39 to 42) contain a substantial portion of the sugar alcohol in crystalline form. This mere difference in wording is insufficient to establish novelty of process step C) over the cited state of the art (see eg decision T 114/86, OJ EPO, 1987, 485).

6.4. The final step D) of claim 7 comprises the feature of "cooling said mass slowly to a point where said alcohols become fully crystallised". The disclosure in the description of the patent in suit referring to the above feature (see especially page 5, lines 6 to 7) reads "and further cooling the blend to ambient temperature forming the crystalline sugar alcohol containing included particulate" compared with the disclosure of the corresponding procedural step in citation (11) (see especially column 4, lines 43 to 45): "and further cooling the plastic magma to ambient temperature forming the modified gamma-sorbitol polymorph".

6.5. The respondent submitted repeatedly in writing and during oral proceedings, that step D) of the claimed process, requiring that the extrudate in the form of a viscous mass be cooled "slowly" to obtain the final product in crystalline form, was not disclosed in the cited state of the art. In this respect the board notes that the term "slowly" is a entirely relative term which may generally vary within extremely broad ranges when used in connection with a cooling process, especially if different sorts of materials are concerned. More specifically, the cooling process of the hot extrudate from step C) is said in the patent in suit to vary typically within the specified wide range of about 6 to about 96 hours depending on the cross-sectional dimension of the extrudate mass and the effect of the added ingredient, including even longer periods for extruded shapes having a cross-sectional dimension of greater than 20 milllimeters.

Thus apart from the fact that the board considers in these circumstances the relative term "slowly" as entirely inappropriate and too vague to delimit the process of claim 7 from the cited state of the art and to establish novelty, it cannot recognise a real difference between the cooling procedure and operating conditions defined in step D) as "cooling said mass (ie the extrudate) slowly to a point where said alcohols become fully crystallised" and the cooling procedure as disclosed in (11) - see point 6.4 above. In the patent in suit, it is explained that the hot extrudate when permitted to stand (this would imply to a skilled person, in the board's opinion, cooling to ambient temperature) will fully crystallise (see page 5, lines 31 to 32). The equivalent procedural step in (11) involves entirely the same procedure and operating conditions, namely further cooling the plastic magma (hot extrudate) to ambient temperature forming the desired crystalline sorbitol.

6.6. Finally, the respondent argued during the oral proceedings that the uniform dispersion of the phosphates within the crystalline sorbitol matrix was not disclosed in the cited state of the art, whereas this uniform dispersion had been demonstrated by the data provided in Table I of the patent in suit. Since the procedural steps and operating conditions in the cited state of the art and in the patent in suit are the same, there is no reason to assume that the products obtained would be different. The appellant argued during the oral proceedings, and the board is satisfied that kneading the molten mass, which is carried in the process disclosed in (11) (see especially column 4, lines 24 to 38) and in the patent in suit (see especially page 4, line 54, to page 5, line 3) using the same specifically equipped extruder, is responsible for the uniform dispersion of the particles of the active material within the crystalline sugar alcohol matrix.

As is apparent from the observations in paragraph VII above, the data presented in Table I of the patent in suit indicate merely the overall content of the active ingredient (phenylpropanolamine hydrchloride) in one single tablet. The board concurs therefore with the appellant's submission, that these data are inappropriate to demonstrate the uniform dispersion of the active ingredient within the crystal matrix of the tablets and to establish a potential difference between the composition resulting from the process according to claim 7 and that obtained by the process disclosed in document (10).

6.7. In conclusion, in the judgment of the board the disclosure of citation (10), when interpreted in the light of the specific reference to citation (11), destroys the novelty of the subject-matter of claim 7, and this claim therefore contravenes Articles 52(1) and 54(1) EPC. Since a decision can only be taken on a request as a whole, there is no need to consider the patentability of claim 1 of any of the main request and auxiliary requests 2 to 5.

First auxiliary request

7. Although this request was presented during the oral proceedings and was, accordingly, filed late, the board, exercising its discretionary power under Article 111(1) EPC, considers that it should be admitted into the proceedings. The respondent submitted that this request was prompted by the discussion in the oral proceedings and was reinforced by some additional submissions on the appellant's part during oral proceedings, namely that the feature "cooling said mass slowly" in step D) of the claimed process was relative and too vague to distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. This assertion appears, prima facie, correct. Although the board does not condone such lateness per se, the exact meaning and impact of the proposed small amendment in claim 7 was immediately clear to the appellant and the board. Coupled with the fact that the appellant to a large extent prompted the amendment contained in the first auxiliary request by its own arguments during oral proceedings, the board exercises its discretion in favour of the respondent.

8. The board finds that amended claim 7 complies with the provisions of Article 84 and Articles 123(2) and (3) EPC. Since this finding was not disputed during oral proceedings, there is no need for further detailed consideration of this matter.

9. Claim 7 as amended requires in step D) that the extrudate from step C) be cooled slowly "over a period of between about 6 and about 96 hours" to a point where the sugar alcohols become fully crystallised. Since a cooling period falling within the period now specified in claim 7 is neither specifically disclosed in the cited state of the art nor otherwise derivable therefrom, the board finds the subject-matter claimed in the first auxiliary request novel within the meaning of Article 54(1) EPC.

10. Starting from citation (10), when interpreted in the light of the specific reference to citation (11), as representing the closest state of the art, the technical problem underlying claim 7 may be seen as that of providing more precise cooling conditions for the extrudate obtained from step C) which allow the particular sugar alcohol in the desired crystalline form to be obtained (see patent specification, especially page 4, lines 31 to 35).

10.1. The solution of the problem consists of permitting the hot extrudate to stand for cooling "over a period of between about 6 and about 96 hours". On the basis of the data provided in the examples of the patent in suit and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary the board is satisfied that the stated technical problem is thereby solved. This was not disputed by the appellant.

10.2. The skilled person already knew that the successive procedural steps and operating conditions used in the state of the art cited in this decision for cooling the molten mixture of sorbitol and particulate material involved the steps of first cooling the mixture as it passes through the extrusion zone until a plastic magma of molten sorbitol and a substantial portion of sorbitol crystals is obtained, followed by cooling the extrudate to ambient temperature so as to obtain the sorbitol matrix in the desired crystal form (see points 6.3 to 6.6 above). For the skilled practitioner with that knowledge determination of the suitable period required to do this would be merely a matter of routine experimentation, without any inventive effort. Moreover, the period specified in claim 7, which may extend over the extremely wide range from about 6 to about 96 hours, cannot be considered as providing an unexpectedly advantageous specific teaching or instruction saving the skilled person the necessity to perform his own experiments; on the contrary, such a wide range would suggest the experiments, albeit routine, could be extensive.

11. In view of the forgoing observations, in the judgment of the board the subject-matter of claim 7 does not involve an inventive step, and this claim therefore is contrary to Articles 52(1) and 56 EPC. Since a decision can only be taken on a request as a whole, there is no need, as regards the first auxiliary request either, to consider the patentability of claim 1.

Order

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.

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