8.3.5 Technical field

In T 422/93 (OJ 1997, 25), the board held that since the technical problem addressed by an invention had to be so formulated as not to anticipate the solution, the skilled person to be considered could not be the appropriate expert in the technical field to which the proposed solution belonged if this technical field was different to the one considered when formulating the technical problem. Nor did the appropriate skilled person's basic knowledge include that of a specialist in the different technical field to which the proposed solution belonged, if the closest prior art gave no indication that the solution was to be sought in this other technical field.

In T 984/15 the board recalled that the technical field and general knowledge associated with the notional skilled person within the meaning of Art. 56 EPC should be defined on the basis of the objective technical problem to be solved by that skilled person in the framework of the problem-solution approach. This was because the skilled person under Art. 56 EPC is the person qualified to solve the established objective technical problem (see e.g. T 32/81, OJ 1982, 225; T 422/93, OJ 1997, 25; T 1140/09; T 1523/11; T 1450/16).