4. Medical methods
  1. Home
  2. Legal texts
  3. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
  4. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office
  5. I. Patentability
  6. B. Exceptions to patentability
  7. 4. Medical methods
  8. 4.4. Surgical methods
  9. 4.4.1 One surgical step in a multi-step method
Print
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

4.4. Surgical methods

Overview

4.4.1 One surgical step in a multi-step method

Opinion G 1/04 (OJ 2006, 334) made it clear that a method claim falls under the prohibition of Art. 52(4) EPC 1973 if it includes at least one feature defining a physical activity or action that constitutes a method step for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy.

In G 1/07 the Enlarged Board upheld this principle confirmed in opinion G 1/04 (OJ 2006, 334). This principle is not only formally justified by the fact that the exclusion under Art. 53(c) EPC does not contain any limitation as to the defined methods being excluded only when claimed as such. More importantly, it is also justified as to substance, i.e. it enables the legislative purpose served by the exclusion to be achieved (see in this chapter I.B.4.1.).

Previous
Next
Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility