2. Enabling disclosure 

Subject-matter can be regarded as having been made available to the public, and therefore as forming part of the state of the art within the meaning of Art. 54(1), only if the information given is sufficient to enable the skilled person, at the relevant date (see G‑VI, 3) and taking into account the common general knowledge in the field at that time, to put the disclosed technical teaching into practice (see T 26/85, T 206/83 and T 491/99).

Where a prior-art document discloses subject-matter which is relevant to the novelty and/or inventive step of the claimed invention, the disclosure of that document must be such that the skilled person can reproduce that subject-matter using common general knowledge (see G‑VII, 3.1). Subject-matter is not necessarily common general knowledge simply because it has been disclosed in the state of the art: in particular, if the information can only be obtained after a comprehensive search, it cannot be considered common general knowledge and cannot be used to complete the disclosure (see T 206/83).

For example, a document discloses a chemical compound (identified by name or by structural formula), indicating that the compound may be produced by a process defined in the document itself. It does not, however, indicate how to obtain the starting materials and/or reagents used in the process. If, moreover, the skilled person cannot obtain these starting materials or reagents on the basis of common general knowledge (e.g. from text books), the document is insufficiently disclosed with respect to that compound. As a result, it is not considered to form part of the state of the art under Art. 54(2) (at least in so far as it relates to that compound) and so does not prejudice the patentability of the claimed invention.

If, on the other hand, the skilled person knows how to obtain the starting materials and reagents (e.g. they are commercially available, or are well-known and appear in reference text books), the document is sufficiently disclosed with respect to the compound and is therefore state of the art under Art. 54(2). The examiner can then validly rely on it to raise objections to the claimed invention.