10. Secondary indicia in the assessment of inventive step
Overview
10. Secondary indicia in the assessment of inventive step
- T 1356/21
Catchword:
1. Novelty in the case of purpose-limited product claims pursuant to Article 54(5) EPC relying on a dosage regimen defined by a numerical range, see point 2.6 of the reasons. 2. Limits to the application of the concept of bonus effect, see point 3.4.3 of the reasons.
- T 1246/21
Catchword:
Since Article 56 EPC and the final stage of the problem‑solution approach both consider what is obvious to a person skilled in the art, an inventive step cannot be denied solely on the finding that the claimed subject-matter is not directly and unambiguously disclosed from the combination of two documents. In other words, when considering the question of whether an invention is obvious starting from a document representing the closest prior art in combination with another document, it is not the mere sum of the teachings of these two documents that has to be considered; the skilled person's common general knowledge and skills must also be taken into account when combining the two documents.