T 0351/19 du 23.06.2022
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T035119.20220623
- Date de la décision
- 23 juin 2022
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0351/19
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 15183537.8
- Classe de la CIB
- G06Q 20/20G06Q 30/04G06Q 20/32G06Q 30/06
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Distribuées aux présidents des chambres de recours (C)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- AUTOMATED SESSION CLOSING UPON LOCATION-SENSED DEPARTURE
- Nom du demandeur
- NCR Corporation
- Nom de l'opposant
- -
- Chambre
- 3.4.03
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 111(1)European Patent Convention Art 52(1)European Patent Convention Art 56Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(4)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)
- Mots-clés
- Inventive step - main request (no)
Late-filed auxiliary requests - admitted (no) - Exergue
- According to the Comvik approach the non-technical features of a claim may be incorporated into a goal to be achieved in a non-technical field. Subsequently, the approach invokes what might be described as the legal fiction that this goal, including the claimed non-technical features, would be presented to the skilled person, who would be charged with the task of technically implementing a solution which would achieve the stated goal. The question whether the skilled person would "arrive" at the non-technical features does not therefore arise, as these features have been made known to the skilled person, as part of the goal to be achieved. The relevant question for the assessment of inventive step is whether it would be obvious for the skilled person to implement a technical solution corresponding to the claimed subject-matter (Reasons, point 3.12).
- Affaires citantes
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed