Skip to main content Skip to footer
HomeHome
 
  • Homepage
  • Searching for patents

    Patent knowledge

    Access our patent databases and search tools.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
      • European Publication Server
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
      • European Patent Bulletin
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
      • Web services
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
    • Technology platforms
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
      • Water innovation
      • Space innovation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
      • Firefighting technologies
      • Clean energy technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Overview
      • First time here?
      • Asian patent information
      • Patent information centres
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
    Image
    Plastics in Transition

    Technology insight report on plastic waste management

  • Applying for a patent

    Applying for a patent

    Practical information on filing and grant procedures.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • European route
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Request for extension/validation
    • International route (PCT)
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide – PCT procedure at the EPO
      • EPO decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • Find a professional representative
    • MyEPO services
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
      • Get access
      • File with us
      • Interact with us on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Forms
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Fees
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
      • International fees (PCT)
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
      • Fee payment and refunds
      • Warning

    UP

    Find out how the Unitary Patent can enhance your IP strategy

  • Law & practice

    Law & practice

    European patent law, the Official Journal and other legal texts.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
      • Unitary patent system
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent
    • Court practices
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
    Image
    Law and practice scales 720x237

    Keep up with key aspects of selected BoA decisions with our monthly "Abstracts of decisions”

  • News & events

    News & events

    Our latest news, podcasts and events, including the European Inventor Award.

    Go to overview 

     

    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Overview
      • The meaning of tomorrow
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the finalists
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventor Prize
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
    • Press centre
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • Innovation and patenting in focus
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
      • Green tech in focus
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
      • The future of medicine
      • Materials science
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
      • Patent classification
      • Digital technologies
      • The future of manufacturing
      • Books by EPO experts
    • "Talk innovation" podcast

    Podcast

    From ideas to inventions: tune into our podcast for the latest in tech and IP

  • Learning

    Learning

    The European Patent Academy – the point of access to your learning

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Overview
      • Learning activities
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Overview
      • EQE - European qualifying examination
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
      • National offices and IP authorities
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and technology transfer centres (TTOs)
    Image
    Patent Academy catalogue

    Have a look at the extensive range of learning opportunities in the European Patent Academy training catalogue

  • About us

    About us

    Find out more about our work, values, history and vision

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Overview
      • Official celebrations
      • Member states’ video statements
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states of the European Patent Organisation
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
      • Administrative Council
    • Principles & strategy
      • Overview
      • Our mission, vision, values and corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
      • Towards a New Normal
    • Leadership & management
      • Overview
      • President António Campinos
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Overview
      • Environmental
      • Social
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Services & activities
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Overview
      • Innovation actors
      • Policy and funding
      • Tools
      • About the Observatory
    • Procurement
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering and electronic signatures
      • Procurement portal
      • Invoicing
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Transparency portal
      • Overview
      • General
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
      • "Long Night"
    Image
    Patent Index 2024 keyvisual showing brightly lit up data chip, tinted in purple, bright blue

    Track the latest tech trends with our Patent Index

 
Website
cancel
en de fr
  • Language selection
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
Main navigation
  • Homepage
    • Go back
    • New to patents
  • New to patents
    • Go back
    • Your business and patents
    • Why do we have patents?
    • What's your big idea?
    • Are you ready?
    • What to expect
    • How to apply for a patent
    • Is it patentable?
    • Are you first?
    • Patent quiz
    • Unitary patent video
  • Searching for patents
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • National patent office databases
        • Global Patent Index (GPI)
        • Release notes
      • European Publication Server
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
        • Cross-reference index for Euro-PCT applications
        • EP authority file
        • Help
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes archive
        • Register documentation
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Deep link data coverage
          • Federated Register
          • Register events
      • European Patent Bulletin
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Download Bulletin
        • EP Bulletin search
        • Help
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Manuals
        • Sequence listings
        • National full-text data
        • European Patent Register data
        • EPO worldwide bibliographic data (DOCDB)
        • EP full-text data
        • EPO worldwide legal event data (INPADOC)
        • EP bibliographic data (EBD)
        • Boards of Appeal decisions
      • Web services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • European Publication Server web service
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
        • Go back
        • Weekly updates
        • Updated regularly
    • Technology platforms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Plastics waste recovery
        • Plastics waste recycling
        • Alternative plastics
      • Innovation in water technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Clean water
        • Protection from water
      • Space innovation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Cosmonautics
        • Space observation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Prevention and early detection
        • Diagnostics
        • Therapies
        • Wellbeing and aftercare
      • Firefighting technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Detection and prevention of fires
        • Fire extinguishing
        • Protective equipment
        • Post-fire restoration
      • Clean energy technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Renewable energy
        • Carbon-intensive industries
        • Energy storage and other enabling technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Vaccines and therapeutics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Vaccines
          • Overview of candidate therapies for COVID-19
          • Candidate antiviral and symptomatic therapeutics
          • Nucleic acids and antibodies to fight coronavirus
        • Diagnostics and analytics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Protein and nucleic acid assays
          • Analytical protocols
        • Informatics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Bioinformatics
          • Healthcare informatics
        • Technologies for the new normal
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Devices, materials and equipment
          • Procedures, actions and activities
          • Digital technologies
        • Inventors against coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • First time here?
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Basic definitions
        • Patent classification
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC)
        • Patent families
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • DOCDB simple patent family
          • INPADOC extended patent family
        • Legal event data
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • INPADOC classification scheme
      • Asian patent information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • China (CN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Chinese Taipei (TW)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • India (IN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
        • Japan (JP)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Korea (KR)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Russian Federation (RU)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Numbering system
          • Searching in databases
        • Useful links
      • Patent information centres (PATLIB)
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
  • Applying for a patent
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • European route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
        • Go back
        • Oral proceedings calendar
          • Go back
          • Calendar
          • Public access to appeal proceedings
          • Public access to opposition proceedings
          • Technical guidelines
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Unitary Patent
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Legal framework
          • Main features
          • Applying for a Unitary Patent
          • Cost of a Unitary Patent
          • Translation and compensation
          • Start date
          • Introductory brochures
        • Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Extension/validation request
    • International route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide
      • Entry into the European phase
      • Decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
        • Go back
        • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programme outline
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • MyEPO services
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Exchange data with us using an API
          • Go back
          • Release notes
      • Get access
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
      • File with us
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • What if our online filing services are down?
        • Release notes
      • Interact with us on your files
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Fees
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • International fees (PCT)
        • Go back
        • Reduction in fees
        • Fees for international applications
        • Decisions and notices
        • Overview
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • Fee payment and refunds
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Payment methods
        • Getting started
        • FAQs and other documentation
        • Technical information for batch payments
        • Decisions and notices
        • Release notes
      • Warning
    • Forms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Find a professional representative
  • Law & practice
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Documentation on the EPC revision 2000
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Diplomatic Conference for the revision of the EPC
            • Travaux préparatoires
            • New text
            • Transitional provisions
            • Implementing regulations to the EPC 2000
            • Rules relating to Fees
            • Ratifications and accessions
          • Travaux Préparatoires EPC 1973
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • EPC Guidelines
        • PCT-EPO Guidelines
        • Unitary Patent Guidelines
        • Guidelines revision cycle
        • Consultation results
        • Summary of user responses
        • Archive
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Unitary Patent system
        • Go back
        • Travaux préparatoires to UP and UPC
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent 
    • Court practices
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
  • News & events
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The meaning of tomorrow
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the inventors
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
        • Go back
        • 2024 activities
        • 2025 activities
        • Rules and criteria
        • FAQ
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
      • The 2025 event
    • Press centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • European Patent Office
        • Q&A on patents related to coronavirus
        • Q&A on plant patents
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • In focus
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
        • Go back
        • CodeFest Spring 2025 on classifying patent data for sustainable development
        • Overview
        • CodeFest 2024 on generative AI
        • CodeFest 2023 on Green Plastics
      • Green tech in focus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About green tech
        • Renewable energies
        • Energy transition technologies
        • Building a greener future
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patents and space technologies
      • Healthcare
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Medical technologies and cancer
        • Personalised medicine
      • Materials science
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Red, white or green
        • The role of the EPO
        • What is patentable?
        • Biotech inventors
      • Classification
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
        • Climate change mitigation technologies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • External partners
          • Updates on Y02 and Y04S
      • Digital technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About ICT
        • Hardware and software
        • Artificial intelligence
        • Fourth Industrial Revolution
      • Additive manufacturing
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About AM
        • AM innovation
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast
  • Learning
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Learning activities: types and formats
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • EQE - European Qualifying Examination
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compendium
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Paper F
          • Paper A
          • Paper B
          • Paper C
          • Paper D
          • Pre-examination
        • Candidates successful in the European qualifying examination
        • Archive
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Innovation case studies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • SME case studies
          • Technology transfer case studies
          • High-growth technology case studies
        • Inventor's handbook
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Introduction
          • Disclosure and confidentiality
          • Novelty and prior art
          • Competition and market potential
          • Assessing the risk ahead
          • Proving the invention
          • Protecting your idea
          • Building a team and seeking funding
          • Business planning
          • Finding and approaching companies
          • Dealing with companies
        • Best of search matters
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Tools and databases
          • EPO procedures and initiatives
          • Search strategies
          • Challenges and specific topics
        • Support for high-growth technology businesses
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Business decision-makers
          • IP professionals
          • Stakeholders of the Innovation Ecosystem
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Paper F brain-teasers
        • Daily D questions
        • European qualifying examination - Guide for preparation
        • EPAC
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compulsory licensing in Europe
        • The jurisdiction of European courts in patent disputes
      • National offices and IP authorities
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Learning material for examiners of national officers
        • Learning material for formalities officers and paralegals
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and TTOs
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Modular IP Education Framework (MIPEF)
        • Pan-European Seal Young Professionals Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • For students
          • For universities
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • IP education resources
            • University memberships
          • Our young professionals
          • Professional development plan
        • Academic Research Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Completed research projects
          • Current research projects
        • IP Teaching Kit
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Download modules
        • Intellectual property course design manual
        • PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa
          • Go back
          • The PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa initiative (KT2A)
          • KT2A core activities
          • Success story: Malawi University of Science and Technology and PATLIB Birmingham
  • About us
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Go back
      • Official celebrations
      • Overview
      • Member states’ video statements
        • Go back
        • Albania
        • Austria
        • Belgium
        • Bulgaria
        • Croatia
        • Cyprus
        • Czech Republic
        • Denmark
        • Estonia
        • Finland
        • France
        • Germany
        • Greece
        • Hungary
        • Iceland
        • Ireland
        • Italy
        • Latvia
        • Liechtenstein
        • Lithuania
        • Luxembourg
        • Malta
        • Monaco
        • Montenegro
        • Netherlands
        • North Macedonia
        • Norway
        • Poland
        • Portugal
        • Romania
        • San Marino
        • Serbia
        • Slovakia
        • Slovenia
        • Spain
        • Sweden
        • Switzerland
        • Türkiye
        • United Kingdom
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Member states by date of accession
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
        • Go back
        • 2024
        • Overview
        • 2023
        • 2022
        • 2021
        • 2020
        • 2019
        • 2018
        • 2017
        • 2016
        • 2015
        • 2014
        • 2013
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Select Committee documents
      • Administrative Council
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Composition
        • Representatives
        • Rules of Procedure
        • Board of Auditors
        • Secretariat
        • Council bodies
    • Principles & strategy
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Mission, vision, values & corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
        • Go back
        • Driver 1: People
        • Driver 2: Technologies
        • Driver 3: High-quality, timely products and services
        • Driver 4: Partnerships
        • Driver 5: Financial sustainability
      • Towards a New Normal
      • Data protection & privacy notice
    • Leadership & management
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the President
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Environmental
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring environmental inventions
      • Social
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring social inventions
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Procurement
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) publications
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering
      • Invoicing
      • Procurement portal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • e-Signing contracts
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Services & activities
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Foundations
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • European Patent Convention
          • Guidelines for examination
          • Our staff
        • Enabling quality
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Prior art
          • Classification
          • Tools
          • Processes
        • Products & services
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
          • Continuous improvement
        • Quality through networking
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • User engagement
          • Co-operation
          • User satisfaction survey
          • Stakeholder Quality Assurance Panels
        • Patent Quality Charter
        • Quality Action Plan
        • Quality dashboard
        • Statistics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
        • Integrated management at the EPO
      • Consulting our users
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Standing Advisory Committee before the EPO (SACEPO)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Objectives
          • SACEPO and its working parties
          • Meetings
          • Single Access Portal – SACEPO Area
        • Surveys
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Detailed methodology
          • Search services
          • Examination services, final actions and publication
          • Opposition services
          • Formalities services
          • Customer services
          • Filing services
          • Key Account Management (KAM)
          • Website
          • Archive
      • Our user service charter
      • European and international co-operation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Co-operation with member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
        • Bilateral co-operation with non-member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Validation system
          • Reinforced Partnership programme
        • Multilateral international co-operation with IP offices and organisations
        • Co-operation with international organisations outside the IP system
      • European Patent Academy
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Partners
      • Chief Economist
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Economic studies
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Innovation against cancer
      • Innovation actors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Startups and SMEs
      • Policy and funding
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Financing innovation programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Our studies on the financing of innovation
          • EPO initiatives for patent applicants
          • Financial support for innovators in Europe
        • Patents and standards
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Publications
          • Patent standards explorer
      • Tools
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Deep Tech Finder
      • About the Observatory
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Work plan
    • Transparency portal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • General
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Annual Review 2023
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • 50 years of the EPC
          • Strategic key performance indicators
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
        • Annual Review 2022
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
        • Go back
        • Insight into computer technology and AI
        • Insight into clean energy technologies
        • Statistics and indicators
          • Go back
          • European patent applications
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Top 10 technical fields
              • Go back
              • Computer technology
              • Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
              • Digital communication
              • Medical technology
              • Transport
              • Measurement
              • Biotechnology
              • Pharmaceuticals
              • Other special machines
              • Organic fine chemistry
            • All technical fields
          • Applicants
            • Go back
            • Top 50
            • Categories
            • Women inventors
          • Granted patents
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Designations
      • Data to download
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
        • Go back
        • Catalyst lab & Deep vision
          • Go back
          • Irene Sauter (DE)
          • AVPD (DK)
          • Jan Robert Leegte (NL)
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #1
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #2
          • Péter Szalay (HU)
          • Thomas Feuerstein (AT)
          • Tom Burr (US)
          • Wolfgang Tillmans (DE)
          • TerraPort
          • Unfinished Sculpture - Captives #1
          • Deep vision – immersive exhibition
          • Previous exhibitions
        • The European Patent Journey
        • Sustaining life. Art in the climate emergency
        • Next generation statements
        • Open storage
        • Cosmic bar
      • "Long Night"
  • Boards of Appeal
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Decisions of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Recent decisions
      • Selected decisions
    • Information from the Boards of Appeal
    • Procedure
    • Oral proceedings
    • About the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • President of the Boards of Appeal
      • Enlarged Board of Appeal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Pending referrals (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Decisions sorted by number (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Pending petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
        • Decisions on petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
      • Technical Boards of Appeal
      • Legal Board of Appeal
      • Disciplinary Board of Appeal
      • Presidium
        • Go back
        • Overview
    • Code of Conduct
    • Business distribution scheme
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technical boards of appeal by IPC in 2025
      • Archive
    • Annual list of cases
    • Communications
    • Annual reports
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
      • Go back
      • Abstracts of decisions
    • Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Archive
  • Service & support
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • FAQ
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
    • Ordering
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Knowledge Products and Services
      • Terms and conditions
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patent information products
        • Bulk data sets
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • Fair use charter
    • Procedural communications
    • Useful links
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent offices of member states
      • Other patent offices
      • Directories of patent attorneys
      • Patent databases, registers and gazettes
      • Disclaimer
    • Contact us
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Filing options
      • Locations
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
    • RSS feeds
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2025 decisions
  • 2024 decisions
  • 2023 decisions
  1. Home
  2. T 1049/08 06-12-2011
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 1049/08 06-12-2011

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T104908.20111206
Date of decision
06 December 2011
Case number
T 1049/08
Petition for review of
-
Application number
99943570.4
IPC class
A61F 5/00
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 52.38 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

Food intake restriction device

Applicant name
Obtech Medical GmbH
Opponent name
EndoArt S.A.
Board
3.2.08
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 54
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention Art 84
European Patent Convention Art 87
European Patent Convention Art 114(2)
European Patent Convention Art 123(2)
Keywords

Admissibility of late field documents - partly

Admissibility of late filed request - yes

Allowability of a new ground of opposition - no

Validity of priority - main request - no

Novelty - main request - no

Validity of priority - auxiliary request - yes

Clarity - auxiliary request - yes

Allowability of amendments - auxiliary request - yes

Inventive step - auxiliary request - yes

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
G 0001/03
G 0002/10
G 0010/91
Citing decisions
G 0001/16
T 1870/08
T 1839/11

I. The appellant (opponent) filed a notice of appeal, received at the EPO on 25 April 2008, against the opposition division's decision posted on 18 February 2008 rejecting the opposition against the European patent EP 1 105 073. The appeal fee was paid simultaneously and the statement of grounds was received on 30 June 2008.

II. Oral proceedings took place before the board of appeal on 6 December 2011.

The appellant requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that European patent 1 105 073 be revoked.

The respondent (patent proprietor) requested that the appeal be dismissed or, that the patent be maintained on the basis of the First Auxiliary Request filed during the oral proceedings.

III. Independent claim 1 as granted reads:

"A food intake restriction device for forming a stoma opening in the stomach or esophagus of a patient, the device comprising:

A) an elongated restriction member (2, 48, 60, 62, 88, 110, 122, 126, 128, 130),

B) forming means (10, 94, 106, 108, 118, 132) for forming the elongated restriction member into at least a substantially closed loop around the stomach or esophagus, said loop defining a restriction opening (3);

C) an adjustment means (12, 52, 66, 90, 92, 104, 110) for adjusting the restriction member in said loop to change the size of said restriction opening,

C1) wherein the adjustment means is designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member

C2) in a non-invasive manner to allow post operation non-invasive adjustment of the restriction member;

D) an implantable signal receiving means (334, 338) comprising a control unit for controlling the adjustment means in response to signals from a wireless remote transmitting means; and

E) an implantable energizer unit for providing energy to energy consuming components of the device,

characterised in that:

E1) the energizer unit is capable of being provided with energy via wireless energy transfer from the signal transmitting means."

Claim 1 according to the First Auxiliary Request differs therefrom by the following additional after feature B:

F) "there is no liquid directly involved in the elongated restriction member itself for providing inflation thereof".

The designation of features A to F has been introduced by the board.

IV. The following document filed within the opposition period was relevant for this decision:

E3a: GB-A-1 174 814.

Following documents were filed by the opponent during the opposition proceedings after the opposition period:

E10: Important information for Patients Considering an Acticon Neosphincter, American Medical Systems Inc., Order no. 23600030B (05/00); and Activon Neosphincter Operation Room Manual, American Medical Systems Inc., Order no. 22000026B (01/02)

E11: Obtech Swedish Adjustable Gastric Band (SAGB) Quick Close, Obtech Medical AG, 2003

E12: Développement d'une gastroplastie avec stoma de vidage variable, Etude expérimentale faisant appel aux sphyincters artificiels, Helv. chir. Acta 58, 789-793 (1991).

Following documents were filed by the opponent together with the grounds of appeal

E13: US-A-4 592 339

E14: EP-A-0 611 561

E15: WO-A- 94/27501

E16: US-A-5 152 770

E17: US-A-5 509 888

E18: WO-A-01/47 431

E19: US-A-4 711 231

E20: WO-A-98/23 232

E21: WO-A-95/28 127 & WO-A-95/28 185.

Following documents were filed by the appellant during the appeal proceedings with letter of 19 October 2011

E22: EP-A-1 113 767

E23: EP-A-1 554 996.

V. The appellant's arguments can be summarised as follows:

(a) Admissibility of the late filed documents

Documents E10 to E12 were filed during the opposition proceedings as a reaction to the provisional opinion issued by the opposition division questioning whether a sphincter could be used as a gastric band. Since these documents provided a link between gastric bands and sphincters, they should have been introduced into the opposition proceedings and should therefore be admitted into the appeal proceedings.

Documents E13 to E21 were filed together with the grounds of appeal, and therefore at the earliest possible time during the appeal proceedings. They have been cited in reaction to the argumentation set forward in the decision of the opposition division and addressed specifically the topic of gastric bands and of their link to sphincters.

E22 and E23 were filed only six weeks before the oral proceedings since the appellant's representative had not realised their importance until that time. They should be admitted into the proceedings since they were highly relevant for the assessment of novelty. Moreover, they could not surprise the respondent since E22 was cited by him as prior art in parallel opposition proceedings and E23 was a divisional application of the patent in suit.

(b) Main request

Allowability of the amendments

The appellant put forward that claim 1 as granted contained subject matter which extended beyond the content of the application as filed.

He acknowledged that the ground of opposition according to Article 100(c) EPC had not been raised in the notice of opposition. However, he wished to pursue it since this ground had already been addressed during the opposition proceedings.

Validity of the priority

Claim 1 as granted did not relate to the same invention disclosed in the priority document US 09/133 320.

This application related exclusively to a food intake restriction device with a restriction member which was non-inflatable. The feature according to which the restriction member was non-inflatable was present in claim 1 as well as throughout the whole description of this document and the US-application did not disclose any inflatable restriction members.

The invention as described in claim 1 as granted, however, did not specify the type of restriction member, hence comprising inflatable restriction members as well. Claim 1 as granted specified merely that the adjustment means were designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member. However, this feature was not equivalent to a non-inflatable restriction member and did not imply its presence.

Moreover, the invention according to the previous application described the control unit exclusively in combination with an electric motor which was not comprised in claim 1 as granted.

Furthermore, in the device according to the priority document the signals were transmitted from the control means to the power unit and the motor was powered via the control unit (see claim 16 and on page 11, lines 19 to 24, page 12, lines 20 to 24 and page 13, lines 5 to 7). Thereby, the control unit was described as being inextricably linked structurally and functionally to these features as shown in Figures 34 and 35 and in the corresponding passages of the description (page 27, lines 12 to 16).However, claim 1 as granted did not describe the transmission of signals and power according to the priority document.

Therefore, claim 1 was not entitled to the priority date of 13 August 1998.

Novelty

E22 disclosed all features of claim 1.

Particularly, the receiving means according to E22 comprised means 29 for controlling the adjustment means (see page 12, lines 8 to 10) which carried out the same tasks as the control unit described in feature D of claim 1.

Moreover, E22 disclosed a condenser 39 which represented an energizer in the sense of feature E of claim 1 (see page 12, lines 28 to 29).

Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 was not novel.

(c) Auxiliary request

Admissibility

The auxiliary request should not be admitted into the proceedings since it was filed at a very late stage of the proceedings and contained a feature extracted from the description.

Validity of the priority

The feature introduced into claim 1 was not sufficient to re-establish the validity priority of claim 1.

It was extracted from the second paragraph of page 3 of the priority document, where it was presented as a result of the mechanical adjustment means. Since this cause-effect link was not present in claim 1 according to the auxiliary request, its subject matter related to a different invention than the priority document.

Moreover, the priority document disclosed only non-inflatable restriction members, while claim 1 according to the auxiliary request excluded only liquids while the use of gases for the inflation of the restriction member was still comprised by its subject matter. Hence, for this reason as well, the subject matter of claim 1 related to a different invention than the previous US-application.

Clarity

The feature introduced into claim 1 according to which "there is no liquid directly involved in the elongated restriction means itself for providing inflation thereof" was not clear in the sense of Article 84 EPC.

Since no clear difference existed between a "direct" and an "indirect" usage of a liquid in a device, the wording "directly involved" was a relative term and hence introduced an unclarity into the claim

The term "itself" in combination with the restriction means was unclear as well since it was not evident where the boundaries of the restriction member "itself" lie.

Finally it was not evident how to determine whether a substance was a liquid or not, especially since the state of a material depended amongst other things from its pressure and temperature.

Allowability of the amendments

Feature F represented a disclaimer and as such it was allowable only under the conditions set out in G 1/03 (see headnote, point 2.3). However, since this disclaimer was relevant for the assessment of inventive step, it was not allowable (see G 1/03, headnote 2.3 in conjunction with G 2/10, page 29, last paragraph).

Moreover, the fact that no liquid was directly involved in the elongated restriction member was originally described on page 3, lines 24 to 29 of the original application as a direct consequence of the mechanical adjustment of the adjustment means, thereby disclosing a cause-effect link between the mechanical adjustment and the absence of liquid. Since this link was not present in claim 1 according to the auxiliary request, it did not comply with the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC for this reason as well.

Inventive step

The food intake restriction device according to E13 represented the closest pre-published prior art. It disclosed a gastric band with the features A, B and C and differed from the subject matter of claim 1 by features C1 to F.

The problem to be solved by the device according to claim 1 was the provision of a food intake restriction device which did not require the use of an injection needle for accomplishing post-operation adjustment of the stoma opening.

E3a related to a sphincter and addressed the same problem as the patent in suit (see column 1, lines 32 to 39). It disclosed a mechanical sphincter which was controlled by remote control means according to the features C1 to E1 of claim 1 of the auxiliary request. Since the circuit according to Figure 5 of E3a did not exclude the possibility of a partial occlusion of the sphincter, its features could be applied directly to the gastric band according to E13 thereby arriving at a gastric band which could be adjusted without the need of an injection needle. Moreover, since E3a described the use of a mechanical occluding member in general terms (see page 1, line 64 and page 2, lines 13 to 26), the skilled person would apply any mechanical restriction member to the gastric band according to E13, hence arriving to the subject matter of claim 1 without the need of any inventive skill.

The subject matter of claim 1 did not involve an inventive step over the combination of E13 with E17 either. The latter disclosed a device for regulating the fluid flow within the human body by changing the shape of restriction means containing magneto rheological fluid. This fluid consisted of a liquid part (paraffin-based solution, column 4, line 39) carrying solid particles of magnetically responsive materials. By activating electro magnetic devices, the solid particles moved towards the internal part of the restriction member and the viscosity of the fluid was enhanced causing a restriction of the restriction member. Since the restriction was caused by the solid particles in the liquid suspension and not by the liquid itself, the latter was not directly involved in the elongated restriction member in the sense of feature F.

Since the device according to E17 solved the problem addressed by the invention in suit, the skilled person would apply it to the gastric band according to E13 hence arriving to the subject matter of claim 1 without the need of any inventive skill.

VI. The respondent's arguments can be summarised as follows:

(a) Admissibility of the late filed documents

Since E10 and E11 were not prior art in the sense of Article 54(2) or (3) EPC and E12 was not more relevant for the assessment of the patentability of the patent in suit than the documents filed within the opposition period, the opposition division exercised their judgement correctly by not admitting these documents into the proceedings.

E13 to E21 which were filed together with the grounds of appeal did not add any further information with respect to the documents filed during the opposition period.

E22 and E23 were filed only six week before the oral proceedings, hence at a very late stage in the proceedings despite of the fact that the appellant had been aware of these documents already for some years.

Therefore, E10 to E23 should not be admitted into the appeal proceedings.

(b) Main request

Allowability of the amendments

The respondent did not give his agreement to the introduction of the new ground of opposition according to Article 100(c) EPC in the appeal proceedings.

Validity of the priority

The feature according to which the adjustment means are designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member (feature C1) had to be understood as meaning that the restriction means was non-inflatable. When interpreting feature C1 the whole teaching of the application had to be taken into account, in particular paragraph [0011] which specified that no liquid is directly involved in the elongated restriction member. Moreover, since exactly the same wording of paragraph [0011] of the patent in suit was used in the priority document on page 3, lines 13 to 16, the subject matter of claim 1 represented the same invention described in the previous US-application with respect to the type of the restriction member.

The term "motor" as used in the previous application had to be interpreted in a broad way as a device which imparts motion and it did not relate exclusively to electrical motors. Therefore, the mechanical adjustment means described in feature C1 of claim 1 as granted represented a "motor".

Moreover, Figure 34 of the priority document disclosed a food intake restriction device according to the invention where no signals were send from the control unit to the energizer unit and where the latter provided directly power to the motor and not via the control unit (see also page 24, line 13 to page 26, line 4). From these passages it was clear that the verb "to power" as used in claim 16 of the previous application when describing the relationship between the control unit and the motor should be understood in the sense of "to control" and not of providing power. Therefore, the food intake restriction device according to claim 1 as granted related to the same invention as the US-application with respect to these features as well and, as a consequence, the priority was validly claimed for the subject matter of claim 1.

Novelty

E22 did not disclose features D and E of claim 1.

It was clear from the description of the patent in suit (see paragraph [0075] in combination with [0085]) that the control unit according to the invention (feature D) was a device comprising a microprocessor able to receive signals, to decode and understand them, and depending on their meaning to control the adjustment means. The device described in Figure 5 of E22 on the contrary was only able to receive the open-close signals emitted by the remote control and to transmit them without any further treatment to the motor. Therefore, E22 did not disclose a control unit in the sense of the claim 1 of the patent in suit.

Moreover, E22 did not disclose an energizer unit according to feature E. As shown in Figure 5, the condenser 39 did transfer energy only to the motor 21 but not to the further energy consuming elements of the device and hence, contrary to the requirements of claim 1, not to all energy consuming components of the device.

Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 was novel with respect to E22.

(c) Auxiliary request

Admissibility

The request should be admitted into the proceedings since it represented a reaction to the board's opinion about the validity of the priority of claim 1 as granted, which was expressed for the first time during the oral proceedings.

Validity of the priority

Feature F was derived literally from page 3, lines 13 to 16 of the previous application. In that context it was related to further features such as adjustment means being designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member and non-invasive post-operative adjustment thereof which were present in claim 1 according to the auxiliary request.

Since no gas was ever used in gastric bands, the feature stating that no liquid is used for inflation of a restriction member corresponded to stating that the restriction member is non-inflatable.

Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 related to the same invention as the previous application and the priority was validly claimed.

Clarity

The feature relating to the direct involvement of the liquid in the restriction member itself could only be understood as meaning that the restriction member was not inflated by a liquid but that a liquid could be used to convey forces to the mechanical restriction member.

Moreover, it was evident how to ascertain whether a substance used in the restriction member of a gastric band was liquid or not given the temperature and pressure at stake in a gastric band.

Allowability of the amendments

Feature F comprised a negative formulation, however, it did not represent a disclaimer let alone a non-disclosed disclaimer -for which the ruling of G 1/03 would apply- since it derived literally from page 3, lines 26 to 29 of the original application.

Therefore, feature F complied with the requirements of Article 123(2) EPC.

Inventive step

Even if the skilled person took the teaching of E3a in consideration for solving the problem underlying the patent in suit, he would apply the concept of remote control disclosed in E3a to the gastric band disclosed in E13, thereby arriving at a gastric band with an inflatable restriction member whose dimension could be altered by remote control. Since such a device already solved the problem posed, the skilled person would not have any reason to replace in a further step the inflatable restriction member of E13 by a non-inflatable one.

Since E17 disclosed a device for regulating the fluid flow within the human body whereby a fluid was present within the restriction member, it directly involved the inflation thereof. Therefore, its combination with a gastric band would not lead at all to the subject matter of claim 1 according to the auxiliary request.

Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 involved an inventive step over the combination of E13 either with E3a or with E17.

1. The appeal is admissible.

2. Admissibility of the late filed documents

2.1 Documents E10 to E12, which had been filed during the opposition proceedings but after the opposition period, were not admitted by the opposition division.

If an opposition division did not consider late filed documents under Article 114(2) EPC, during the appeal proceedings it has only to be assessed whether the opposition division exercised their discretion correctly or not.

In the present case, the opposition division had not considered E10 and E11 since they do not represent prior art under Article 54(2) or (3) EPC. E12 was not introduced into the proceedings since this document did not disclose any non-invasive transcutaneous signal transfer in the sense of claim 1 and was not prima facie relevant.

Since these findings are correct, the opposition division exercised its discretion in a non objectionable way. Therefore, E10 to E12 are not admitted into the appeal proceedings either.

2.2 E13 to E21 have been filed together with the grounds of appeal, therefore at the earliest point in time in the appeal proceedings and as a reaction to the argumentation set out in the decision of the opposition division. Since filing new documents reinforcing the line of attack already made before the department of first instance has to be considered as the normal behaviour of a losing party, the filing of these documents does not constitute an abuse of procedure. Therefore, E13 to E21 are admitted into the proceedings.

2.3 E22 and E23 have been filed six weeks before the oral proceedings, and therefore within the time period stipulated in the communication accompanying the summons to oral proceedings. These documents had been known to the respondent for some time since E23 is a divisional application of the patent in suit and E22 was cited by the proprietor in a parallel opposition proceedings. Moreover, both documents are prima facie of crucial relevance for the assessment of the novelty of patent in suit. Therefore, they are admitted into the proceedings.

3. Main request

3.1 Allowability of the amendments

According to G 10/91 a fresh ground of opposition can be considered in the appeal proceedings only with the approval of the patent proprietor.

In the present case the ground of opposition according to Article 100(c) EPC had not been raised in the notice of opposition. This ground was addressed by the appellant only during the opposition proceedings. However, it was not admitted by the opposition division. Therefore, the Article 100(c) EPC objection must be considered as a new ground.

Since the respondent did not give its consent to the introduction of the ground of opposition according to Article 100(c) EPC, it is not considered in the appeal proceedings.

3.2 Validity of the priority

The patent in suit claims the priority of the US application No. 09/133 320. In order for the priority of a claim to be valid it must, amongst other conditions, relate to the same invention as the previous application (see Article 87(1)(b) EPC).

3.2.1 The US-application relates to a food intake restriction device comprising a restriction member which is non-inflatable. This characteristic of the restriction member is present throughout the whole application (both in claim 1 and in the description, see e.g. page 3, lines 13 to 16) and must be considered as a crucial aspect of the invention underlying the priority document. Therefore, the presence of this feature is essential in an independent claim of a further application to ensure that it relates to the same invention.

Claim 1 as granted refers to a gastric band with a restriction member comprising adjustment means designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member. The respondent argued that such adjustment means intrinsically required the presence of a non-inflatable restriction member and that this was confirmed by the description of a non-inflatable restriction member on page 3, lines 13 to 16 of the patent in suit.

However, what is relevant for the assessment of the validity of the priority of a claim is the subject matter of the claim and not the content of the whole patent. It is correct that the patent describes a non-inflatable restriction member on page 3, lines 13 to 16, however, this does not limit the claimed invention exclusively to non-inflatable restriction members. Therefore, the question to be answered is whether or not the presence of adjustment means which mechanically adjusts the restriction member stringently implies that the restriction member is non-inflatable.

Since it is possible to mechanically adjust an inflatable restriction means (for example by a cylinder-piston assembly), the use of adjustment means which mechanically adjust the restriction member does not imply the presence of a non-inflatable restriction member. Hence, with respect to this feature, the claimed subject matter does not correspond to the same invention as the previous application.

3.2.2 The term "motor" as used in the priority document is to be understood generally as a device which imparts motion and hence does not need to be an electrical motor. A motor in this general meaning is present in claim 1 in form of the mechanical adjustment means (see feature C1). Therefore, the omission of the term "electric motor" in claim 1 cannot affect the validity of the claimed priority.

3.2.3 Figure 34 of the US-application shows in combination with page 24, lines 13 to page 26, line 4 that the energizer unit provides power directly to the motor. Therefore, the control unit according to the invention of the previous application does not provide the motor with power but only controls the energizer unit and hence the adjustment means. Therefore, the term "to power" as used in the previous application has not to be understood as meaning the provision of power but as "to control the provision of power". Since claim 1 as granted claims that the control unit is for controlling the adjustment means, it corresponds to the same invention as the previous application with respect to this feature.

3.2.4 With respect to the above findings, in particular those in section 3.2.1, the subject matter of claim 1 does not correspond to the same invention as the priority document. Therefore, priority of 13 August 1998 is not valid and E22 is comprised in the state of the art according to Article 54(3) EPC.

3.3 Novelty

E22 undisputedly discloses (see particularly Figures 1 to 5):

A food intake restriction device for forming a stoma opening in the stomach or esophagus of a patient, the device comprising:

an elongated restriction member (12),

forming means (13, 17) for forming the elongated restriction member into at least a substantially closed loop around the stomach or esophagus, said loop defining a restriction opening;

and an adjustment means (3) for adjusting the restriction member in said loop to change the size of said restriction opening,

wherein the adjustment means is designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member

in a non-invasive manner to allow post operation non-invasive adjustment of the restriction member,

comprising an implantable energizer unit capable of being provided with energy via wireless energy transfer from the signal transmitting means (see the paragraph bridging pages 11 and 12).

E22 further discloses an implantable signal receiving means (11) comprising a control unit (29) for controlling the adjustment means in response to signals from a wireless remote transmitting means. The term "control means" is a well established expression which describes a part of a device which controls the operation of the other units of the device. Contrary to the respondent's submissions, the concept of controlling does not inherently comprise the step of decoding and understanding the signals before forwarding them to the entity which has to be controlled as it is described in the patent in suit. Therefore, E22 discloses feature D as well.

Furthermore, E22 discloses an implantable energizer unit (the electro-chemical condenser 39) for providing energy to energy consuming components of the device (see page 12, line 36 to page 13, line 3). Since feature E does not require that the energizer unit provides energy to all consuming components of the device, E22 discloses feature E as well.

Therefore E22 discloses all features of claim 1 and its subject matter is not novel.

4. Auxiliary request

4.1 Admissibility of the auxiliary request

The request was filed as a reaction to the board's opinion on the validity of the priority of claim 1 according to the main request, which was expressed for the first time during the oral proceedings. The feature introduced into the claim was indeed extracted from the description but since it had been the subject of long discussions already in the written proceedings, its introduction into the claim could not be surprising for the appellant. Therefore, the request is admitted into the proceedings.

4.2 Validity of the priority

Feature F is derived literally from page 3, lines 13 to 16 of the previous application. The paragraph comprising this feature describes further features of the gastric band, such as adjustment means being designed to mechanically adjust the restriction member and non-invasive post-operative adjustment thereof. Claim 1 according to the auxiliary request comprises all these features even though not in immediate succession. Therefore, it claims the same device described on page 3 of the previous application. It is irrelevant whether or not any cause-effect link between the different features is specified, since the introduction of such a combination would not change the subject matter of the claim.

It is correct that in principle the wording of claim 1 would encompass the use of a gas for inflating the restriction means while the priority document related exclusively to non-inflatable restriction means. However, due to the application of the restriction means within a gastric band the use of a gas for inflation is excluded as a matter of fact. Therefore, in the present context, feature F according to which no liquid is involved in the restriction member for providing inflation thereof corresponds to the feature according to which the restriction member is non-inflatable.

Hence, the invention defined in claim 1 of the auxiliary request is the same as that of the priority document and the priority is validly claimed.

4.3 Clarity

The feature introduced into claim 1 according to which "there is no liquid directly involved in the elongated restriction member itself for providing inflation thereof" is clear.

In the context of the present claim, the wording "directly involved" can only be interpreted as meaning that no liquid is used in the restriction member for changing its dimension by inflation. It is correct that the feature introduced into the claim allows a liquid to be used for conveying forces to the restriction means, i.e. the liquid can be involved indirectly, e.g. in the form of a hydraulic actuator, however this does not render the wording unclear.

The term "itself" as used in feature F only stresses the fact that no liquid is involved in the elongated restriction member. The fact that the boundaries of the restriction member are not specified in the claim is not linked to the term "itself" and does not render it unclear. If at all the absence of a definition of the boundaries might become relevant for ascertaining the novelty and inventive step of the subject matter of the claim. Moreover, since the sentence would have exactly the same meaning if the term "itself" was left out, this term cannot introduce any unclarity or vagueness into the feature.

In contradiction to the appellant's opinion, the term "liquid" has a clear and well known physical meaning. As for example described in Collins English Dictionary, Fourth Edition, 1998, a liquid is "a substance in a physical state in which it does not resist change of shape but does resist change of size". Therefore, this term per se is clear. It is correct that the state of a substance changes depending on its temperature and pressure and that a liquid may become a solid or a gas. However, in the present case, claim 1 refers exclusively to a liquid and not to a solid or a gas.

Therefore, feature F complies with the requirements of Article 84 EPC as well.

4.4 Allowability of the amendments

By stating that no liquid is involved in the elongated restriction member for providing inflation thereof, feature F comprises a negative formulation and disclaims the use of liquids for inflation of the restriction member.

However, it is permissible to restrict the subject-matter using a negative limitation i.e. a disclaimer if -as in the present case- adding positive features to the claim either would not define more clearly and concisely the subject-matter still protectable or would unduly limit the scope of the claim.

The decision G 1/03 cited by the appellant refers to so-called "undisclosed disclaimers", i.e. to disclaimers which do not have any basis in the application as filed. It is correct that such disclaimers are only allowable if they meet the conditions set out in G 1/03. However, since the limitation introduced by feature F is derived literally from page 3, lines 26 to 29 of the original application it has a basis in the original application and does not represent an undisclosed disclaimer but a disclaimer for a disclosed subject matter. Hence G 1/03 is not relevant in the present case.

G 2/10 which deals with the allowability of disclosed disclaimers exclusively states that an amendment to a claim by the introduction of such a disclaimer infringes Article 123(2) EPC if the subject-matter remaining after the introduction of the disclaimer is not disclosed in the application as filed (see headnote 1a). Moreover, G 2/10 points out that G 1/03 refers exclusively to undisclosed disclaimers (see G 2/10, section 3, in particular 3.9). Consequently, G 2/10 has to be considered in the present case. Since the subject matter remaining after the introduction of feature F is clearly disclosed in the originally filed application (see arguments brought forward under 4.2 above in the context of validity of the priority which apply to the allowability of the amendments as well), a fact which has not been challenged by the appellant, the amendments introduced into claim 1 are allowable under Article 123(2) EPC.

4.5 Inventive step

4.5.1 E13 discloses:

A food intake restriction device for forming a stoma opening in the stomach or esophagus of a patient, the device comprising:

an elongated restriction member (12),

forming means (16) for forming the elongated restriction member into at least a substantially closed loop around the stomach or esophagus, said loop defining a restriction opening.

Claim 1 according to the auxiliary request undisputedly differs therefrom by features C1 to F.

Starting from E13, the technical problem to be solved by the device according to claim 1 is the provision of a gastric band which does not require the use of an injection needle for accomplishing post-operation adjustment of the stoma opening (see [0008] of the patent in suit).

4.5.2 E3a discloses a device for occluding and releasing ducts in the human body which can be operated from the outside (see page 1, lines 33 to 40) and would be taken into consideration by the skilled person in order to solve the problem posed. For changing the size of the duct, the device according to E3a comprises an occluding body which can be operated pneumatically, hydraulically, mechanically or electrically and is connected with operating means for closing or releasing the occluding body operated by remote control (see page 1, lines 32 to 70).

When applying the teaching of E3a to the gastric band of E13, the skilled person would apply the concept of the remote control to the restriction means of E13 thereby arriving at a gastric band with an elongated restriction member which is inflated by the direct involvement of a liquid, whereby the degree of inflation is controlled by remote control means. Such a device would still differ from the gastric band according to claim 1 in that a liquid is directly involved in the inflation of the elongated restriction member. Moreover, since this device already solves the problem posed, the skilled person would not have any reason for further modifying it by replacing the inflatable restriction means of E13 by a mechanical one wherein no liquid is directly involved. Such a modification would be based on hindsight knowledge of the invention.

Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 is not rendered obvious by the combination of E13 and E3a.

4.5.3 D17 discloses a device for regulating the fluid flow within the human body. This device consists of an annular ring having a chamber filled with magneto rheological fluid surrounding the duct to be restricted. The device changes its shape due to the change of the viscosity and apparent density of the magneto rheological fluid caused by electromagnetic induction devices. The activation of the electromagnetic induction devices is controlled from outside the body (see column 6, lines 58 to 61).

The combination of the device according to E17 with the gastric band of E13 would lead to a gastric band which can change its shape through a remote control and thereby solves the problem posed. However, also this gastric band would still comprise a restriction member where a liquid is directly involved in the inflation thereof.

The appellant argues that since in a magnetorheological fluid the particles and not the liquid are responsible for the change in shape of the device, the liquid is not directly involved in the restriction means. However, the means for changing the shape of the chamber consist of a mixture of the solid particles and the liquid and, without the liquid part, the solid particles alone would not be able to change the shape of the restriction member. Hence the liquid is directly involved in the inflation of the chamber and the combination of the teaching of E13 and E17 does not lead in an obvious way to the subject matter of claim 1.

4.5.4 Therefore, the subject matter of claim 1 according to the auxiliary request involves an inventive step with respect to the prior art cited by the appellant.

Order

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The decision under appeal is set aside.

The case is remitted to the opposition division with the order to maintain the patent on the basis of the following documents:

claim 1 as filed during the oral proceedings;

claims 2 to 54 as granted; and

a description and drawings to be adapted.

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