G 0001/04 (Diagnostic methods) du 16.12.2005

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence

ECLI:EP:BA:2005:G000104.20051216

Date de la décision

16 décembre 2005

Numéro de l'affaire

G 0001/04

Requête en révision de

Numéro de la demande

Classe de la CIB

Langue de la procédure

Anglais

Distribution

Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)

Téléchargement

Décision en anglais

Versions JO

Autres décisions pour cet affaire

Résumés pour cette décision

Titre de la demande

Nom du demandeur

Nom de l'opposant

Chambre

Sommaire

1. In order that the subject-matter of a claim relating to a diagnostic method practised on the human or animal body falls under the prohibition of Article 52(4) EPC, the claim is to include the features relating to:

(i) the diagnosis for curative purposes stricto sensu representing the deductive medical or veterinary decision phase as a purely intellectual exercise,

(ii) the preceding steps which are constitutive for making that diagnosis, and

(iii) the specific interactions with the human or animal body which occur when carrying those out among these preceding steps which are of a technical nature.

2. Whether or not a method is a diagnostic method within the meaning of Article 52(4) EPC may neither depend on the participation of a medical or veterinary practitioner, by being present or by bearing the responsibility, nor on the fact that all method steps can also, or only, be practised by medical or technical support staff, the patient himself or herself or an automated system. Moreover, no distinction is to be made in this context between essential method steps having diagnostic character and non-essential method steps lacking it.

3. In a diagnostic method under Article 52(4) EPC, the method steps of a technical nature belonging to the preceding steps which are constitutive for making the diagnosis for curative purposes stricto sensu must satisfy the criterion "practised on the human or animal body".

4. Article 52(4) EPC does not require a specific type and intensity of interaction with the human or animal body; a preceding step of a technical nature thus satisfies the criterion "practised on the human or animal body" if its performance implies any interaction with the human or animal body, necessitating the presence of the latter.

Dispositions juridiques pertinentes

European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(b) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 4(3) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 52(1) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 52(2) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 52(4) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 53(c)European Patent Convention Art 57 1973 European Patent Convention Art 84 1973 European Patent Convention R 29 1973

Mots-clés

Diagnostic methods under Article 52(4) EPC representing inventions excluded from patentability by means of a legal fiction
Proper construction of the terms 'diagnostic methods' and 'practised on the human or animal body' referred to in Article 52(4) EPC - requirements of clarity and legal certainty - difficulty of defining medical and veterinary practitioners on a European level within the framework of the EPC - essential features of a diagnostic method excluded from patent protection under Article 52(4) EPC - qualification of an activity as having a diagnostic character - requirements for a diagnostic method to be regarded as being practised on the human or animal body

Exergue

Affaires citées

T 0116/85 T 0385/86 T 0603/89 T 0775/92 T 0530/93 T 1165/97 T 0807/98 T 0310/99 T 0964/99

Affaires citantes

G 0001/07 G 0002/08 G 0002/12 G 0002/13 G 0003/19 T 0678/90 T 0125/02 T 0663/02 T 1102/02 T 1153/02 T 1197/02 T 0330/03 T 0619/03 T 0990/03 T 0992/03 T 0009/04 T 0143/04 T 0154/04 T 0883/04 T 1262/04 T 1374/04 T 0080/05 T 0623/05 T 0666/05 T 1110/05 T 0238/06 T 0542/06 T 0814/06 T 0826/06 T 0868/06 T 1075/06 T 1123/06 T 1224/06 T 1255/06 T 0170/07 T 1039/07 T 1280/07 T 1546/07 T 1670/07 T 1695/07 T 1814/07 T 2003/07 T 0898/08 T 1328/08 T 1403/08 T 1798/08 T 2003/08 T 2302/08 T 1599/09 T 1635/09 T 0273/10 T 0569/10 T 1016/10 T 2187/10 T 2369/10 T 2091/11 T 0475/12 T 0699/12 T 0809/12 T 1540/12 T 1315/13 T 2098/13 T 2427/13 T 0489/14 T 1140/14 T 1180/14 T 1774/14 T 1957/14 T 2068/14 T 0141/15 T 0148/15 T 1232/15 T 1479/15 T 1730/15 T 2135/15 T 2276/15 T 0030/16 T 0786/16 T 1927/16 T 1994/16 T 2573/16 T 0135/17 T 0731/17 T 1091/17 T 0467/18 T 1423/18 T 2257/18 T 2605/18 T 2899/18 T 0256/19 T 0529/19 T 0699/19 T 1056/19 T 1560/19 T 1835/19 T 3097/19 T 0056/21 T 0110/21 T 1920/21 T 1256/22 T 1553/22 T 1741/22 T 0616/23 T 1883/23 T 1884/23 T 1989/23 T 0417/24 T 0556/24

CONCLUSION

For these reasons

the point of law referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal by the President of the EPO is answered as follows:

(i) the diagnosis for curative purposes stricto sensu representing the deductive medical or veterinary decision phase as a purely intellectual exercise,

(ii) the preceding steps which are constitutive for making that diagnosis, and

(iii) the specific interactions with the human or animal body which occur when carrying those out among these preceding steps which are of a technical nature.