G 0001/24 (The description and any drawings are always referred to when interpreting the claims, and not just in the case of unclarity or ambiguity.) du 18.06.2025

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence: ECLI:EP:BA:2025:G000124.20250618
Date de la décision: 18 juin 2025
Numéro de l'affaire: G 0001/24
Requête en révision de: -
Numéro de la demande: 14806330.8
Classe de la CIB: A24F 47/00 A24D 1/00
Langue de la procédure: Anglais
Distribution: Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
Téléchargement: Décision en anglais
Versions JO: Allemand
Anglais
Français
Autres décisions pour cet affaire: -
Résumés pour cette décision: Résumé de Article 069 EPC
Titre de la demande: HEATED AEROSOL GENERATING ARTICLE WITH THERMAL SPREADING WRAP
Nom du demandeur: Philip Morris Products S.A.
Nom de l'opposant: Yunnan Tobacco International Co., Ltd.
Chambre: -
Sommaire: The claims are the starting point and the basis for assessing the patentability of an invention under Articles 52 to 57 EPC. The description and drawings shall always be consulted to interpret the claims when assessing the patentability of an invention under Articles 52 to 57 EPC, and not only if the person skilled in the art finds a claim to be unclear or ambiguous when read in isolation.
Dispositions juridiques pertinentes: Decision of the Unified Patent Court cited:EPC2000_Art_069_Protocol_Interpretation_Art_1European Patent Convention Art 52 European Patent Convention Art 53 European Patent Convention Art 54 European Patent Convention Art 55 European Patent Convention Art 56 European Patent Convention Art 57 European Patent Convention Art 69 European Patent Convention Art 69(1)European Patent Convention Art 84Order of the Court of Appeal of the Unified Patent Court (CoA UPC): NanoString Technologies -v- 10x Genomics, UPC CoA 335/2023, App 576355/2023 of 26 February 2024, as rectified by the order of 11 March 2024
Mots-clés: referral is admissible (yes)
diverging lines of case law (yes)
The description and any drawings are always referred to when interpreting the claims (yes)
Exergue: -
Affaires citées: G 0005/83 G 0002/88 G 0006/88 G 0003/08 G 0002/12 T 1871/09 T 2684/17 T 1473/19 T 0439/22
Affaires citantes: T 0439/22 T 0641/22 T 0697/22 T 1645/22 T 1867/22 T 2048/22 T 2063/22 T 2067/22 T 2116/22 T 2263/22 T 2357/22 T 2387/22 T 2552/22 T 0243/23 T 0311/23 T 0356/23 T 0367/23 T 0385/23 T 0400/23 T 0514/23 T 0618/23 T 0669/23 T 0695/23 T 0727/23 T 0744/23 T 0873/23 T 0933/23 T 0981/23 T 1052/23 T 1069/23 T 1071/23 T 1121/23 T 1164/23 T 1211/23 T 1226/23 T 1232/23 T 1302/23 T 1351/23 T 1465/23 T 1489/23 T 1503/23 T 1515/23 T 1555/23 T 1561/23 T 1571/23 T 1596/23 T 1620/23 T 1659/23 T 1775/23 T 1819/23 T 1820/23 T 1846/23 T 1849/23 T 1937/23 T 1963/23 T 1973/23 T 1993/23 T 1999/23 T 2000/23 T 2001/23 T 2027/23 T 2034/23 T 2047/23 T 0018/24 T 0040/24 T 0072/24 T 0078/24 T 0161/24 T 0375/24 T 0384/24 T 0389/24 T 0405/24 T 0412/24 T 0456/24 T 0508/24 T 0566/24 T 0837/24 T 0866/24 T 0870/24 T 1205/24 T 1311/24 T 1402/24 T 0235/25

ORDER

The claims are the starting point and the basis for assessing the patentability of an invention under Articles 52 to 57 EPC. The description and drawings shall always be consulted to interpret the claims when assessing the patentability of an invention under Articles 52 to 57 EPC, and not only if the person skilled in the art finds a claim to be unclear or ambiguous when read in isolation.