9.2.15 Mental acts / modelling

In T 914/02 the board held that the involvement of technical considerations is not sufficient for a method which may exclusively be carried out mentally to have technical character. Technical character may be provided through the technical implementation of the method, resulting in the method providing a tangible, technical effect, such as the provision of a physical entity as the resulting product or a non-abstract activity, such as through the use of technical means. The board rejected a claim directed to an invention involving technical considerations and encompassing technical embodiments on the grounds that the invention as claimed could also be exclusively performed by purely mental acts excluded from patentability under Art. 52(2)(c) EPC (see T 619/02, OJ 2007, 63; T 388/04, OJ 2007, 16, T 1073/06).

In T 930/05 the application was concerned with a method for modelling a process network. The board held that the method lacked technical character because though the claimed subject-matter comprised technical embodiments, implementations that could be deemed non-technical were also conceivable.

In T 1171/06 the application related to object-oriented modelling, namely a method and a device for modelling a mechatronic system in a motor vehicle. The board held that a model used in software development was not imparted a technical effect because it served documentation or communication, even if its subject-matter was a technical system. The board continued the approach established in T 354/07. In that case, which concerned the automatic generation of program code from a model, the board had noted that conceptual processes and meta methods for software production generally had no technical features relevant for patentability and thus could not provide a basis for inventive step unless it could be demonstrated, in a given case, that there was a direct causal connection with a technical effect relevant for solving a technical problem.