Information
Diese Seite ist nur auf Englisch verfügbar.
Recently published decisions
All board of appeal decisions released for publication in the last three months are shown in the list below (newest first). The website checks for new decisions daily and updates the list accordingly. For full lists per year, please access the subpages.
March 2025
Novelty - (no)
Amendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (no)
Remittal - (yes)
Hilfsantrag 1a: Änderung des Vorbringens - Antrag zugelassen (ja)
Hilfsantrag 1a, 2a, 20a: Erfinderische Tätigkeit - (nein)
Hilfsantrag 20b: Änderungen - zulässig (nein)
Hilfsantrag 20c: Erfinderische Tätigkeit - (ja)
Novelty - main request (no)
Added subject-matter - all auxiliary requests (yes)
Inventive step - (no): determination of the objective technical problem under the established problem-solution approach
Inventive step - conclusions of T 495/91 not followed
Novelty - main request (no)
Novelty - auxiliary request 3 (no)
Novelty - auxiliary request 5 (yes)
Inventive step - auxiliary requests 1 and 2 (no)
Inventive step - auxiliary request 5 (yes)
Claims - clarity
Claims - auxiliary request 4 (no)
Auxiliary requests 1 to 5 - appeal case directed to requests on which decision was based (yes)
Basis of decision - text or agreement to text withdrawn by patent proprietor
Basis of decision - patent revoked
1. The rationale of the Enlarged Board of Appeal's decisions
G 2/88 and G 6/88 is limited to claims directed to (new) non-medical uses of a known compound for a particular purpose, rather than to processes for production within the meaning of Article 64(2) EPC. In order to be a limiting technical feature of the claim, the (new) purpose must relate to the use rather than to a property of the product (see Reasons 15).
2. Claims which when correctly construed are directed to processes resulting in products referred to in Article 64(2) EPC are not subject to the special treatment established under G 2/88 and G 6/88, even if they contain the word "use" (see Reasons 9).
3. Where an invention relates to a new technical effect of a physical entity that can only occur as part of a process for the production or manufacture of a product, such that it is inextricably linked to and cannot occur in isolation from the production process, a claim directed to the "use" of the physical entity to achieve that effect must be regarded as directed to the production process per se (see Reasons 23).
4. For the criteria to be used in deciding whether auxiliary requests were admissibly raised in opposition proceedings, in the sense of Article 12(4) RPBA, see Reasons 38 to 52.
Novelty - (no)
Category of granted claims
Second non-medical indication (no)
Auxiliary requests admissibly raised in opposition proceedings (no)
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no)
Einspruchsgründe - mangelnde Neuheit
Neuheit (ja)
Zurückverweisung (ja)
Rückzahlung der Beschwerdegebühr - Antrag auf mündliche Verhandlung zurückgenommen (ja)
Remittal - (yes)
Remittal - fundamental deficiency in first-instance proceedings (yes)
Amendment to case - admitted (yes)
Right to be heard - substantial procedural violation (yes)
Reimbursement of appeal fee - (yes)
Late-filed evidence - error in use of discretion at first instance (yes)
Petition for review - clearly unallowable
Fundamental violation of Article 113(1) EPC - no