Skip to main content Skip to footer
HomeHome
 
  • Accueil
  • Recherche de brevets

    Connaissances des brevets

    Accéder à nos bases de données brevets et à nos outils de recherche.

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Informations techniques
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Espacenet - recherche de brevets
      • Serveur de publication européen
      • Recherche EP en texte intégral
    • Informations juridiques
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Registre européen des brevets
      • Bulletin européen des brevets
      • Plan du site de l'Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
      • Observations de tiers
    • Informations commerciales
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
      • Rapports d’analyse sur les technologies
    • Données
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Données liées ouvertes EP
      • Jeux de données de masse
      • Services Internet
      • Couverture, codes et statistiques
    • Plateformes technologiques
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Le plastique en pleine mutation
      • Innovation autour de l'eau
      • Innovation spatiale
      • Des technologies pour lutter contre le cancer
      • Technologies de lutte contre les incendies
      • Technologies énergétiques propres
      • Lutte contre le coronavirus
    • Ressources utiles
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Il s'agit de votre première visite ? Qu'est-ce que l'information brevets ?
      • Information brevets de l'Asie
      • Centres d'information brevets (PATLIB)
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Commerce et statistiques
      • Informations relatives au brevet unitaire pour la connaissance des brevets
    Image
    Plastics in Transition

    Rapport d’analyse sur les technologies de gestion des déchets plastiques

  • Demander un brevet

    Demander un brevet

    Informations pratiques concernant les procédures de dépôt et de délivrance.

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Voie européenne
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Guide du brevet européen
      • Oppositions
      • Procédure orale
      • Recours
      • Brevet unitaire et juridiction unifiée du brevet
      • Validation nationale
      • Requête en extension/validation
    • Voie internationale (PCT)
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Guide euro-PCT : procédure PCT devant l'OEB
      • Décisions et communiqués
      • Dispositions et ressources PCT
      • Requête en extension/validation
      • Programme de partenariat renforcé
      • Traitement accéléré des demandes PCT
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
      • Formations et manifestations
    • Demandes nationales
    • Trouver un mandataire agréé
    • Services MyEPO
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Comprendre nos services
      • Accéder aux services
      • Effectuer un dépôt
      • Intervenir sur un dossier
      • Disponibilité de services en ligne
    • Formulaires
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Requête en examen
    • Taxes
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Taxes européennes (CBE)
      • Taxes internationales (PCT)
      • Taxes du brevet unitaire
      • Paiements des taxes et remboursements
      • Avertissement

    up

    Découvrez comment le brevet unitaire peut améliorer votre stratégie de PI

  • Informations juridiques

    Informations juridiques

    Droit européen des brevets, Journal officiel et autres textes juridiques.

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Textes juridiques
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Convention sur le brevet européen
      • Journal officiel
      • Directives
      • Système d'extension/de validation
      • Accord de Londres
      • Droit national relatif à la CBE
      • Unitary patent system
      • Mesures nationales relatives au brevet unitaire
    • Pratiques juridictionnelles
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Colloque des juges européens de brevets
    • Consultations d'utilisateurs
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Consultations en cours
      • Consultations fermées
    • Harmonisation matérielle du droit des brevets
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Groupe B+
    • Convergence des pratiques
    • Options pour les mandataires agréés
    Image
    Law and practice scales 720x237

    Restez à jour des aspects clés de décisions choisies grâce à notre publication mensuelle "Abstracts of decisions”

  • Actualités et événements

    Actualités et événements

    Nos dernières actualités, podcasts et événements.

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

     

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Actualités
    • Événements
    • Prix de l'inventeur européen
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • À propos du prix
      • Catégories et prix
      • Rencontrez les finalistes
      • Proposer un inventeur
      • European Inventor Network
      • La cérémonie 2024
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • À propos du prix
      • Appel à candidatures
      • Le jury
      • Le monde, réinventé
      • La cérémonie 2025
    • Centre de presse
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Patent Index et statistiques
      • Recherche dans le centre de presse
      • Rappel des faits
      • Droits d'auteur
      • Contact presse
      • Demande de rappel
      • Service d'alerte par courriel
    • Coup de projecteur sur l'innovation et la protection par brevets
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
      • Green tech in focus
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Brevets et société
      • Technologies spatiales et satellitaires
      • L'avenir de la médecine
      • Science des matériaux
      • Communications mobiles
      • Brevets dans le domaine des biotechnologies
      • Patent classification
      • Technologies numériques
      • La fabrication de demain
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast "Talk innovation"

    podcast

    De l’idée à l’invention : notre podcast vous présente les actualités en matière de technologies et de PI

  • Formation

    Formation

    L'Académie européenne des brevets – point d'accès pour vos formations

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Activités de formation et parcours d'apprentissage
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Activités de formation
      • Parcours d’apprentissage
    • EEQ et CEAB
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • EEQ – Examen européen de qualification
      • CEAB – Certificat européen d’administration des brevets
      • CSP – Programme de soutien aux candidats
    • Ressources par centre d'intérêt
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Délivrance des brevets
      • Transfert et diffusion de technologies
      • Application des droits de brevet et contentieux en matière de brevets
    • Ressources de formation par profil
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Entreprise et responsables PI
      • Candidats à l'EEQ et CEAB
      • Juges, juristes et parquets
      • Bureaux nationaux et autorités de PI
      • Conseils en brevets et assistants juridiques
      • Universités, centres de recherche et centre de transfert de technologie
    Image
    Patent Academy catalogue

    Un vaste éventail d’opportunités de formation dans le catalogue de l’Académie européenne des brevets

  • Découvrez-nous

    Découvrez-nous

    En savoir plus sur notre travail, nos valeurs, notre histoire et notre vision.

    Consulter la vue d'ensemble 

    • Vue d'ensemble
    • L'OEB en bref
    • Les 50 ans de la Convention sur le brevet européen
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Official celebrations
      • Member states’ video statements
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Concours d’art collaboratif pour enfants
    • Fondements juridiques et États membres
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Fondements juridiques
      • États membres de l'Organisation européenne des brevets
      • Etats autorisant l’extension
      • Etats autorisant la validation
    • Conseil d'administration et organes auxiliaires
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Communiqués
      • Calendrier
      • Documentation
      • Le Conseil d'administration de l'Organisation européenne des brevets
    • Principes et stratégie
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Mission, vision et valeurs
      • Plan stratégique 2028
      • Vers une nouvelle normalité
    • Présidence et Comité de direction
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Président António Campinos
      • Comité consultatif de direction
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Environmental
      • Social
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Services et activités
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Nos services et notre structure
      • Qualité
      • Consultation de nos utilisateurs
      • Coopération européenne et internationale
      • Académie européenne des brevets
      • Économiste en chef
      • Bureau de médiation
      • Signaler des actes répréhensibles
    • Observatoire des brevets et des technologies
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Technologies
      • Acteurs de l'innovation
      • Politique et financement
      • Outils
      • À propos de l'Observatoire
    • Achats
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Plan d’achats prévisionnel
      • La passation de marchés avec l'OEB
      • Procédures d'achat
      • Politique d'achat durable
      • Comment s‘enregistrer pour appels à la concurrence électroniques et signatures électroniques
      • Portail des achats
      • Facturation
      • Conditions générales
      • Appels à la concurrence archivés
    • Portail de transparence
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Généralités
      • Capital humain
      • Capital environnemental
      • Capital organisationnel
      • Capital social et relationnel
      • Capital économique
      • Gouvernance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • Historique de l'OEB
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Années 1970
      • Années 1980
      • Années 1990
      • Années 2000
      • Années 2010
      • Années 2020
    • La collection d'art de l'OEB
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • La collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artistes
      • Médiathèque
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Espace Culture A&T 5-10
      • "Longue nuit"
    Image
    Patent Index 2024 keyvisual showing brightly lit up data chip, tinted in purple, bright blue

    Suivez les dernières tendances technologiques grâce à notre Patent Index

 
Website
cancel
en de fr
  • Language selection
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
Main navigation
  • Homepage
    • Go back
    • Êtes-vous novice en matière de brevets ?
  • Êtes-vous novice en matière de brevets ?
    • Go back
    • Votre entreprise et les brevets
    • Pourquoi les brevets existent-ils ?
    • Quelle est votre grande idée ?
    • Êtes-vous prêts ?
    • Ce qui vous attend
    • Comment déposer une demande de brevet
    • Mon idée est-elle brevetable?
    • Êtes-vous le premier ?
    • Quiz sur les brevets
    • Vidéo sur le brevet unitaire
  • Recherche de brevets
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Informations techniques
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Espacenet - recherche de brevets
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Bases de données des offices nationaux et régionaux
        • Global Patent Index (GPI)
        • Notes de version
      • Serveur de publication européen
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Notes de version
        • Tableau de correspondance pour les demandes Euro-PCT
        • Fichier d’autorité EP
        • Aide
      • Recherche EP en texte intégral
    • Informations juridiques
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Registre européen des brevets
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Notes de version archive
        • Documentation sur le Registre
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Couverture de données pour lien profonds
          • Registre fédéré
          • Événements du Registre
      • Bulletin européen des brevets
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Télécharger les fichiers du Bulletin
        • Recherche dans le Bulletin EP
        • Help
      • Plan du site de l'Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
      • Observations de tiers
    • Informations commerciales
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
        • Go back
        • Notes de version
      • Rapports d’analyse sur les technologies
    • Données
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Données liées ouvertes EP
      • Jeux de données de masse
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Manuals
        • Listages de séquences
        • Données nationales en texte intégral
        • Données du Registre européen des brevets
        • Données bibliographiques mondiale de l'OEB (DOCDB)
        • Données EP en texte intégral
        • Données mondiales de l'OEB relatives aux événements juridiques (INPADOC)
        • Données bibliographiques EP (EBD)
        • Décisions des chambres de recours de l'OEB
      • Services Internet
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Services brevets ouverts (OPS)
        • Serveur de publication européen (service web)
      • Couverture, codes et statistiques
        • Go back
        • Mises à jour hebdomadaires
        • Mises à jour régulières
    • Plateformes technologiques
      • Go back
      • Le plastique en pleine mutation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Récupération des déchets plastiques
        • Recyclage des déchets plastiques
        • Matières plastiques de substitution
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • L'innovation dans les technologies de l'eau
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Eau salubre
        • Protection contre l'eau
      • Innovation spatiale
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Astronautique
        • Observation spatiale
      • Des technologies pour lutter contre le cancer
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Prévention et détection précoce
        • Diagnostics
        • Thérapies
        • Bien-être et suivi
      • Technologies de lutte contre les incendies
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Détection et prévention des incendies
        • Extinction des incendies
        • Matériel de protection
        • Technologies de restauration après incendie
      • Technologies énergétiques propres
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Énergies renouvelables
        • Industries à fortes émissions de carbone
        • Stockage de l’énergie et autres technologies complémentaires
      • Lutte contre le coronavirus
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Vaccins et thérapies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Vaccins
          • Aperçu des traitements candidats contre la Covid-19
          • Antiviral et traitement symptomatique candidats
          • Acides nucléiques et anticorps de lutte contre le coronavirus
        • Diagnostics et analyses
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Diagnostics - essais basés sur une protéine ou un acide nucléique
          • Protocoles analytiques
        • Informatique
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Bioinformatique
          • Informatique médicale
        • Les technologies de la nouvelle normalité
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Appareils, matériel et équipements
          • Procédures, actions et activités
          • Technologies numériques
        • Les inventeurs en lutte contre le coronavirus
    • Ressources utiles
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Il s'agit de votre première visite ? Qu'est-ce que l'information brevets ?
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Définitions de base
        • Classification des brevets
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Classification coopérative des brevets (CPC)
        • Familles de brevets
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Famille de brevets simple DOCDB
          • Famille de brevets élargie INPADOC
        • À propos des événements juridiques
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Système de classification INPADOC
      • Information brevets de l'Asie
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • China (CN)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Taipei Chinois (TW)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Inde (IN)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
        • Japon (JP)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Corée (KR)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Fédération de Russie (RU)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Facts and figures
          • Numbering system
          • Searching in databases
        • Useful links
      • Centres d'information brevets (PATLIB)
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Commerce et statistiques
      • Informations relatives au brevet unitaire pour la connaissance des brevets
  • Demander un brevet
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Voie européenne
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Guide du brevet européen
      • Oppositions
      • Procédure orale
        • Go back
        • Calendrier des procédures orales
          • Go back
          • Accès du public à la procédure de recours
          • Accès du public à la procédure d’opposition
          • Calendrier des procédures orales
          • Directives techniques
      • Recours
      • Brevet unitaire et juridiction unifiée du brevet
        • Go back
        • Brevet unitaire
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Cadre juridique
          • Principales caractéristiques
          • Comment obtenir un brevet unitaire
          • Coût d'un brevet unitaire
          • Traduction et compensation
          • Date de début
          • Introductory brochures
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Juridiction unifiée du brevet
      • National validation
      • Requête en extension/validation
    • Demandes internationales
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Guide euro-PCT
      • Entrée dans la phase européenne
      • Décisions et communiqués
      • Dispositions et ressources PCT
      • Requête en extension/validation
      • Programme de partenariat renforcé
      • Traitement accéléré des demandes PCT
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
        • Go back
        • Programme Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) – Présentation
      • Formations et manifestations
    • Voie nationale
    • Services MyEPO
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Comprendre nos services
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Exchange data with us using an API
          • Go back
          • Notes de version
      • Accéder aux services
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Notes de version
      • Effectuer un dépôt
        • Go back
        • Effectuer un dépôt
        • Que faire si nos services de dépôt en ligne sont indisponibles ?
        • Notes de version
      • Intervenir sur un dossier
        • Go back
        • Notes de version
      • Disponibilité de services en ligne
    • Taxes
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Taxes européennes (CBE)
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Décisions et communiqués
      • Taxes internationales (PCT)
        • Go back
        • Réduction des taxes
        • Taxes pour les demandes internationales
        • Décisions et communiqués
        • Vue d'ensemble
      • Taxes du brevet unitaire
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Décisions et avis
      • Paiements des taxes et remboursements
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Modes de paiement
        • Premiers pas
        • FAQs et autre documentation
        • Informations techniques concernant les paiements groupés
        • Décisions et communiqués
        • Notes de version
      • Avertissement
    • Formulaires
      • Go back
      • Requête en examen
      • Vue d'ensemble
    • Trouver un mandataire agréé
  • Informations juridiques
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Textes juridiques
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Convention sur le brevet européen
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Archive
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Documentation sur la révision de la CBE en 2000
            • Go back
            • Vue d'ensemble
            • Conférence diplomatique pour la révision de la CBE
            • Travaux préparatoires
            • Nouveau texte
            • Dispositions transitoires
            • Règlement d'exécution de la CBE 2000
            • Règlement relatif aux taxes
            • Ratifications et adhésions
          • Travaux Préparatoires CBE 1973
      • Journal officiel
      • Directives
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Directives CBE
        • Directives PCT de l'OEB
        • Directives relatives au brevet unitaire
        • Cycle de révision des directives
        • Consultation results
        • Résumé des contributions des utilisateurs
        • Archive
      • Système d'extension/de validation
      • Accord de Londres
      • Droit national relatif à la CBE
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Archive
      • Système du brevet unitaire
        • Go back
        • Travaux préparatoires to UP and UPC
      • Mesures nationales relatives au brevet unitaire
    • Pratiques juridictionnelles
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Colloque des juges européens de brevets
    • Consultations d'utilisateurs
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Consultations en cours
      • Consultations fermées
    • Harmonisation matérielle du droit des brevets
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Groupe B+
    • Convergence des pratiques
    • Options pour les mandataires agréés
  • Actualités et événements
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Actualités
    • Événements
    • Prix de l'inventeur européen
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • À propos du prix
      • Catégories et prix
      • Découvrir les inventeurs
      • Proposer un inventeur
      • European Inventor Network
        • Go back
        • 2024 activities
        • 2025 activities
        • Rules and criteria
        • FAQ
      • La cérémonie 2024
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • À propos du prix
      • Appel à candidatures
      • Le jury
      • The world, reimagined
      • La cérémonie 2025
    • Centre de presse
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Patent Index et statistiques
      • Recherche dans le centre de presse
      • Rappel des faits
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • L'Office européen des brevets
        • Questions/réponses sur les brevets en lien avec le coronavirus
        • Questions/réponses sur les brevets portant sur des végétaux
      • Droits d'auteur
      • Contact presse
      • Formulaire - Demande de rappel
      • Service d'alerte par courriel
    • Coup de projecteur
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Technologies liées à l'eau
      • CodeFest
        • Go back
        • CodeFest Spring 2025 on classifying patent data for sustainable development
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • CodeFest 2024 sur l'IA générative
        • CodeFest 2023 sur les plastiques verts
      • Green tech in focus
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • About green tech
        • Renewable energies
        • Energy transition technologies
        • Building a greener future
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Brevets et société
      • Technologies spatiales et satellitaires
        • Go back
        • Brevets et technologies spatiales
        • Vue d'ensemble
      • L'avenir de la médecine
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Technologies médicales et cancer
        • Personalised medicine
      • Science des matériaux
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Nanotechnologie
      • Communications mobiles
      • Biotechnologie
        • Go back
        • Biotechnologies rouges, blanches ou vertes
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Rôle de l’OEB
        • Inventions brevetables
        • Les inventeurs dans le domaine des biotechnologies
      • Classification
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Nanotechnology
        • Climate change mitigation technologies
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • External partners
          • Updates on Y02 and Y04S
      • Technologies numériques
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • A propos des TIC
        • Matériel et logiciel
        • Intelligence artificielle
        • Quatrième révolution industrielle
      • Fabrication additive
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • À propos de la FA
        • Innover avec la FA
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast
  • Formation
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Activités de formation et parcours d'apprentissage
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Activités de formation : types et formats
      • Parcours d’apprentissage
    • EEQ et CEAB
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • EEQ – Examen européen de qualification
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Compendium
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Épreuve F
          • Épreuve A
          • Épreuve B
          • Épreuve C
          • Épreuve D
          • Examen préliminaire
        • Candidats reçus
        • Archives
      • CEAB – Certificat européen d’administration des brevets
      • CSP – Programme de soutien aux candidats
    • Ressources de formation par centre d'intérêt
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Délivrance des brevets
      • Transfert et diffusion de technologies
      • Application des droits de brevet et contentieux en matière de brevets
    • Ressources de formation par profil
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Enterprises et responsables IP
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Innovation case studies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • SME case studies
          • Technology transfer case studies
          • Études de cas : technologies à forte croissance
        • Inventor's handbook
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • 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
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Tools and databases
          • EPO procedures and initiatives
          • Search strategies
          • Challenges and specific topics
        • Support for high-growth technology businesses
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Business decision-makers
          • IP professionals
          • Stakeholders of the Innovation Ecosystem
      • Candidats à l'EEQ et CEAB
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Casse-têtes sur l'épreuve F
        • Questions D quotidiennes
        • Examen européen de qualification - Guide de préparation
        • CEAB
      • Juges, juristes et parquets
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Compulsory licensing in Europe
        • Compétences des juridictions européennes pour les litiges en matière de brevets
      • Offices nationaux et administrations de la PI
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Parcours d'apprentissage pour les examinateurs de brevets des offices nationaux
        • Parcours d'apprentissage pour agents des formalités et assistants juridiques
      • Conseils en brevets et assistants juridiques
      • Universités, centres de recherche et Offices de Transfert Technologique
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Cadre modulaire d'enseignement de la propriété intellectuelle (MIPEF)
        • Programme de stages professionnels "Pan-European Seal"
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Pour les étudiants
          • Pour les universités
            • Go back
            • Vue d'ensemble
            • Ressources éducatives sur la propriété intellectuelle
            • Adhésion universitaire
          • Nos jeunes professionnel(le)s
          • Programme de développement professionnel
        • Programme de recherche académique (ARP)
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Projets de recherche finalisés
          • Projets de recherche en cours
        • Kit d'enseignement sur la PI
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Télécharger des modules
        • Manuel de conception de cours sur la propriété intellectuelle
        • PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa
          • Go back
          • Activités fondamentales
          • Parcours inspirants et témoignages
  • Découvrez-nous
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • L'OEB en bref
    • Les 50 ans de la CBE
      • Go back
      • Official celebrations
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • 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
      • Concours d’art collaboratif pour enfants
    • Fondements juridiques et États membres
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Fondements juridiques
      • Etats membres
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Etats membres selon la date d'adhésion
      • Etats autorisant l’extension
      • Etats autorisant la validation
    • Conseil d'administration et organes auxiliaires
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Communiqués
        • Go back
        • 2024
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • 2023
        • 2022
        • 2021
        • 2020
        • 2019
        • 2018
        • 2017
        • 2016
        • 2015
        • 2014
        • 2013
      • Calendrier
      • Documentation
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Documents du Comité restreint
      • Conseil d'administration
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Composition
        • Représentants
        • Règlement intérieur
        • Collège des commissaires aux comptes
        • Secrétariat
        • Organes
    • Principes et stratégie
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Mission, vision et valeurs
      • Plan stratégique 2028
        • Go back
        • Levier 1 : Les personnes
        • Levier 2 : Les technologies
        • Levier 3 : Des produits et services de grande qualité
        • Levier 4 : Les partenariats
        • Levier 5 : La pérennité financière
      • Vers une nouvelle normalité
      • Protection des données et confidentialité
    • Présidence et Comité de direction
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • A propos du Président
      • Comité consultatif de direction
    • La pérennité à l'OEB
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Pérennité environnementale
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inventions environnementales inspirantes
      • Pérennité sociale
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inventions sociales inspirantes
      • Gouvernance et pérennité financière
    • Achats
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Plan d’achats prévisionnel
      • La passation de marchés avec l'OEB
      • Procédures d'achat
      • Publications du système d'acquisition dynamique
      • Politique d'achat durable
      • Sur appels à la concurrence électroniques
      • Facturation
      • Portail des achats
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Signature électronique des contrats
      • Conditions générales
      • Appels à la concurrence archivés
    • Services et activités
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Nos services et notre structure
      • Qualité
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Fondements
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • La Convention sur le brevet européen
          • Directives relatives à l'examen
          • Notre personnel
        • Comment stimuler la qualité
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • État de la technique
          • Système de classification
          • Outils
          • Des procédés gages de qualité
        • Produits et services
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Recherches
          • Examens
          • Oppositions
          • Amélioration continue
        • La qualité grâce au travail en réseau
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Engagement des utilisateurs
          • Coopération
          • Enquêtes visant à évaluer le degré de satisfaction
          • Groupes de parties prenantes sur l'assurance de la qualité
        • Charte sur la qualité des brevets
        • Plan d'action pour la qualité
        • Quality dashboard
        • Statistiques
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Recherche
          • Examen
          • Opposition
        • Gestion intégrée à l'OEB
      • Consultation de nos utilisateurs
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Comité consultatif permanent auprès de l'OEB
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Objectifs
          • Le SACEPO et ses groupes de travail
          • Réunions
          • Espace délégués
        • Enquêtes
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Méthodologie détaillée
          • Services de recherche
          • Services d'examen, actions finales et publication
          • Services d'opposition
          • Services de Formalités
          • Service clientèle
          • Services de dépôt
          • Gestion des grands comptes
          • Site web de l'OEB
          • Archives
      • Notre charte du service clientèle
      • Coopération européenne et internationale
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Coopération avec les Etats membres
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
        • Coopération bilatérale avec les États non membres
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Le système de validation
          • Programme de partenariat renforcé
        • Organisations internationales, coopération tripartite et IP5
        • Coopération avec les organisations internationales en dehors du système de PI
      • Académie européenne des brevets
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Partenaires
      • Économiste en chef
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Études économiques
      • Bureau de l'Ombud
      • Signaler des actes répréhensibles
    • Observatoire des brevets et des technologies
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Technologies
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Innovation contre le cancer
        • Robotique d'assistance
        • Technologies spatiales
      • Acteurs de l'innovation
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Start-ups et PME
          • Go back
          • Publications
          • Vue d'ensemble
        • Les universités de recherche et les organismes publics de recherche
      • Politique et financement
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Programme de financement de l'innovation
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Nos études sur le financement de l'innovation
          • Initiatives de l'OEB pour les demandeurs de brevet
          • Soutien financier pour les innovateurs en Europe
        • Brevets et normes
          • Go back
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • Publications
          • Patent standards explorer
      • Outils
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Deep Tech Finder
      • À propos de l'Observatoire
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Programme de travail
    • Transparency portal
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Généralités
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Bilan annuel 2024
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Résumé
          • Levier 1 – Les personnes
          • Levier 2 – Les technologies
          • Levier 3 – Des produits et des services de grande qualité délivrés dans les délais
          • Levier 4 – Les partenariats
          • Levier 5 – La pérennité financière
        • 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
          • Vue d'ensemble
          • 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
      • Capital humain
      • Capital environnemental
      • Capital organisationnel
      • Capital social et relationnel
      • Capital économique
      • Gouvernance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • 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
    • Historique
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Collection d'art
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • La collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artistes
      • Médiathèque
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Espace Culture 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
          • Expositions précédentes
        • The European Patent Journey
        • Sustaining life. Art in the climate emergency
        • Next generation statements
        • Open storage
        • Cosmic bar
      • "Longue nuit"
  • Chambres de recours
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Décisions des chambres de recours
      • Go back
      • Décisions récentes
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Sélection de décisions
    • Communications des chambres de recours
    • Procédure
    • Procédures orales
    • À propos des chambres de recours
      • Go back
      • Vue d’ensemble
      • Président des chambres de recours
      • Grande Chambre de recours
        • Go back
        • Vue d’ensemble
        • 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)
      • Chambres de recours techniques
      • Chambre de recours juridique
      • Chambre de recours statuant en matière disciplinaire
      • Praesidium
        • Go back
        • Vue d’ensemble
    • Code de conduite
    • Plan de répartition des affaires
      • Go back
      • Vue d’ensemble
      • Technical boards of appeal by IPC in 2025
      • Archive
    • Liste annuelle des affaires
    • Communications
    • Rapport annuel
      • Go back
      • Vue d’ensemble
    • Publications
      • Go back
      • Résumés des décisions
    • La Jurisprudence des Chambres de recours
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Archive
  • Service et ressources
    • Go back
    • Vue d'ensemble
    • Mises à jour du site Internet
    • Disponibilité de services en ligne
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
    • FAQ
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
    • Publications
    • Commande
      • Go back
      • Connaissances des Brevets - Produits et Services
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Conditions générales
        • Go back
        • Vue d'ensemble
        • Produits d'informations brevets
        • Donnés brutes
        • Services brevets ouverts (OPS)
        • Charte d'utilisation équitable
    • Notifications relatives aux procédures
    • Liens utiles
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Offices des brevets des Etats membres
      • Autres offices des brevets
      • Répertoires de conseils en propriété industrielle
      • Bases de données, registres et gazettes des brevets
      • Disclaimer
    • Centre d'abonnement
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • S'abonner
      • Gérer ses préférences
      • Se désabonner
    • Contactez-nous
      • Go back
      • Vue d'ensemble
      • Options de dépôt
      • Localisations
    • Jours fériés
    • Glossaire
    • Flux RSS
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Vue d'ensemble
  • 2025 decisions
  • 2024 decisions
  • 2023 decisions
  1. Accueil
  2. T 0945/18 (Immunoglobulin purification/F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) 14-12-2021
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0945/18 (Immunoglobulin purification/F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) 14-12-2021

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
ECLI:EP:BA:2021:T094518.20211214
Date de la décision
14 December 2021
Numéro de l'affaire
T 0945/18
Requête en révision de
-
Numéro de la demande
09796320.1
Classe de la CIB
A61K 39/395
C07K 16/06
C07K 1/18
Langue de la procédure
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Téléchargement et informations complémentaires:

Décision en EN 476.96 KB
Les documents concernant la procédure de recours sont disponibles dans le Registre européen des brevets
Informations bibliographiques disponibles en:
EN
Versions
Non publié
Titre de la demande

Immunoglobulin purification

Nom du demandeur
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG
Nom de l'opposant

Zeman, Steven M., Ph.D

Biotest AG

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & CO. KG

UCB Biopharma SRL

Taylor Wessing LLP

Dr. Bettenhausen, Berthold

Baxter Innovations GmbH

Chambre
3.3.04
Sommaire
-
Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
European Patent Convention Art 83
European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)
Mot-clé

Main request, auxiliary requests 1 to 8: sufficiency of disclosure - (no);

Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no)

Exergue
-
Décisions citées
G 0002/88
G 0001/03
T 0939/92
T 0601/05
T 1859/08
Décisions dans lesquelles la présente décision est citée
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal of the patent proprietor (appellant) lies from the decision of the opposition division revoking European patent No. 2 379 108 ("the patent"), entitled "Immunoglobulin purification".

II. Seven oppositions were filed against the patent. The opposition proceedings were based, inter alia, on the ground for opposition under Article 100(b) EPC. Opponents 1 to 7 are respondents I to VII in the

appeal proceedings.

III. The decision under appeal dealt with sets of claims of a main request and auxiliary requests 1 to 11. The opposition division held, inter alia, with respect to auxiliary request 1, that claim 1 was directed to obtaining any immunoglobulin in monomeric form, but that many immunoglobulins could not be obtained in monomeric form within the narrow pH range recited in the claim. The same considerations were held to apply to claim 1 of auxiliary requests 2 and 3. Accordingly, the invention as defined in claim 1 of auxiliary requests 1 to 3 was not sufficiently disclosed (Article 83 EPC). With respect to the sets of claims of auxiliary requests 4 to 6, the opposition division held that amended claim 1 extended the protection conferred by the patent (Article 123(3) EPC). Claim 1 of auxiliary requests 7 to 11 was considered to be unclear (Article 84 EPC).

IV. With the statement setting out the grounds of appeal, the appellant submitted sets of claims of a main request and auxiliary requests 1 to 8. The sets of claims of the main request and auxiliary requests 1

and 2 and of auxiliary requests 6, 7, 8 are identical to the sets of claims of auxiliary requests 1, 2, 3 and 4, 5, 6 respectively, on which the decision under appeal was based. The sets of claims of auxiliary requests 3, 4 and 5 were newly filed on appeal.

Claim 1 of the main request reads:

"Use of a membrane anion exchange chromatography material for obtaining an immunoglobulin in monomeric form depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments in a method which comprises the following step:

applying an aqueous, buffered solution comprising an immunoglobulin in monomeric and in aggregated form and immunoglobulin fragments to said anion exchange chromatography material, wherein the aqueous, buffered solution has a pH value of from pH 8.0 to pH 8.5,

whereby the immunoglobulin depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments is recovered from the flow-through of the anion exchange chromatography material and thereby an immunoglobulin in monomeric form is obtained."

Claim 1 of auxiliary request 1 differs from claim 1 of the main request in that an additional step is inserted after the "whereby-clause" at the end of the claim as follows: "wherein said method comprises prior to the anion exchange chromatography step an additional protein A chromatography step."

Claim 1 of auxiliary request 2 is identical to claim 1 of auxiliary request 1 except that the pH range is limited to "pH 8.5".

Claim 1 of auxiliary requests 3, 4 and 5 is identical to claim 1 of the main request and auxiliary requests 1 and 2 respectively, but with the term "immunoglobulin" amended to read "monoclonal immunoglobulin".

Claim 1 of auxiliary requests 6, 7 and 8 is identical to claim 1 of the main request and auxiliary requests 1 and 2 respectively, except that the term "immunoglobulin" is replaced by the expression "monoclonal antibody".

V. Respondents I and V provided replies to the statement of grounds of appeal addressing substantive issues. They made submissions concerning, inter alia, claim construction and the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

VI. The board scheduled oral proceedings, as requested by the appellant and respondents I, V and VII. It issued a communication under Article 15(1) RPBA in which it indicated its preliminary opinion with respect to, inter alia, the construction of claim 1 of the main request and the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

VII. In response thereto, respondents I, II, IV, V, VI and VII announced that they would not be attending the oral proceedings. The appellant, for its part, made further submissions with respect to claim construction and sufficiency of disclosure.

VIII. Oral proceedings were held by videoconference in the absence of respondents I, II, IV, V, VI and VII in accordance with Rule 115(2) EPC and Article 15(3) RPBA.

During the oral proceedings the appellant submitted the following questions for referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:

"1. If a claim to the use of a known compound for a particular purpose, which is based on a technical effect which is described in the patent, is to be interpreted as including that technical effect as a limiting functional technical feature relevant in the assessment of patentability under Article 54 EPC

(G 2/88), can the same technical feature be disregarded as a limiting functional technical feature in the assessment of patentability under Article 83 EPC?

2. Does it make a difference in the assessment of patentability under Article 83 EPC whether said limiting functional technical feature is literally expressed in the claim or is inherent in the claim?"

At the end of the oral proceedings, the Chair announced the board's decision.

IX. The following documents are referred to in the present decision:

D7 Ion Exchange Chromatography & Chromatofocusing,

(2004), Handbooks from Amersham Biosciences,

Chapter 1 including coverpage, bibliographic

pages and final page indicating the publication

date, pages 1 to 28

D20 http://www.agrisera.com/en/info/molecular-

weight-and-isoelectric-point-of-various-

Immunoglobulins, page 1

D25 Fahrner R.L. et al., Biotechnology & Genetic

Reviews (2001), Vol. 18, pages 307 to 327

D30 Jiskoot W. et al., Journal of Immunological

Methods, (1989), Vol. 124, pages 143 to 156

X. The appellant's arguments are summarised below.

Main request - claim 1

Claim construction

The claim was for the use of a known compound for a new purpose within the meaning of decision G 2/88

(headnote III, Reasons, points 9 and 9.1). That decision provided a "self-correcting mechanism" for non-medical use claims. Thus, a claim directed to a use of a compound for a particular purpose, which was based on a technical effect described in the patent, should be interpreted as including that technical effect as a functional technical feature.

The technical effect described in the patent was that the immunoglobulin in monomeric form did not bind to the stationary phase whereas the immunoglobulin in aggregated form and/or the immunoglobulin fragments did bind to the stationary phase and were removed therewith from the solution (see lines 17 to 21 in paragraph [0024]). The skilled person would have understood that solutions with different pH values were used in the Examples of the patent in order to determine the pI value of the immunoglobulins (see Examples 1, 2, 3 and 4, Figures 1a, 1b, 2b and 3). The skilled person would have furthermore understood which pI the immunoglobulins needed to have to be separated from aggregates and fragments in order to be in the flow-through in the claimed use, namely a suitable pI.

Therefore, in addition to the two functional limitations explicitly recited in the claim, i.e. the claimed purpose and the technical result, an additional functional technical feature limiting the claim to particular immunoglobulins was implied based on the effect described in the patent. This functional technical feature excluded from the claim all immunoglobulins which could not be obtained in the desired form due to their pI value "by way of legal construction".

The claim construction must be the same in relation to all patentability requirements. The legal fiction provided by decision G 2/88 in terms of a limitation of a claim in the context of assessing novelty applied also in the context of assessing sufficiency of disclosure. It applied all the more in the present case, in which the technical effect was explicitly stated in the claim. The effect that was stated in the claim was "self-corrected" with the result that antibodies that could not be separated were not embraced by the claim.

Also for medical use claims the approach that the technical effect was a functional technical feature of a claim that excluded non-working embodiments despite the absence of a functional limitation in the claim was applied in the case law. In decision T 601/05 of 24 April 2008, the claim was "self-corrected" with the result that antibodies which were not useful (i.e. had no pharmaceutical effect) were not covered "by way of legal construction" (see Reasons, point 6.5).

In decision T 1859/08, the achievement of the therapeutic effect was considered a technical feature of the claim although it was not stated in the claim (see Reasons, point 13).

The same had to apply for the use claim under consideration where the effect was explicitly stated in the claim. Accordingly, the claim under consideration was "self-corrected" and embodiments not achieving the effect were not covered by it.

The Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 9th edition 2019, section I.C.8.1.3; decision T 1822/12 (Reasons, point 3.1 and the decisions cited in the sub-points) and decision T 1039/09 (Reasons, point 11) confirmed that the criteria set out in decision G 2/88 were applicable to the claim at issue.

Referral of questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

The appellant requested that, in the event of the board considering that the legal construction provided by decision G 2/88 was only relevant for assessing novelty and not for assessing sufficiency of disclosure, the first question (see section VIII) be referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

The appellant requested that, in the event of the board distinguishing between functional technical features explicitly mentioned in the claim and functional technical features implied due to legal construction/fiction, the second question be referred

(see section VIII) to the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

The claimed invention was sufficiently disclosed in the patent because, upon proper construction, the technical effect being part of the claim acted as a "self-correcting mechanism" and non-working embodiments were not covered by the claim. The skilled person, having regard to document D7, would understand the claimed invention and could carry it out for immunoglobulins with a suitable pI.

In view of the common general knowledge, the skilled person could ascertain without undue burden that all immunoglobulins with a pI below 8.0 to 8.5 would be unsuitable in the claimed use due to their negative charge at the claimed pH. These immunoglobulins were not within the claimed scope.

No serious doubts had been raised, substantiated by verifiable facts, thereby showing that the invention could not be put into practice over the whole ambit claimed for all immunoglobulins with a suitable pI.

Decision G 1/03 (see Reasons, point 2.5.2) supported the appellant's case because the skilled person was aware of a large number of conceivable immunoglobulins having a suitable pI that could be purified within the pH range recited in the claim.

The requirements of Article 83 EPC were met.

Auxiliary requests 1 to 8 - claim 1

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

The claimed invention was sufficiently disclosed because non-working embodiments were not covered by the claims as a consequence of the "use" feature.

XI. Respondent I's arguments are summarised below.

Main request - claim 1

Claim construction

The term "an immunoglobulin" was not limited, e.g. with respect to the immunoglobulin's pI, and immunoglobulins differed substantially in their pI values (see

document D20, page 1, and document D30, page 153, right-hand column, second paragraph).

The claim recited the purpose as a limiting functional technical feature, expressed as a technical effect.

According to decision G 2/88 the purpose of a use claim was limiting. This did not mean, however, that any immunoglobulin that could not be purified in flow-through mode at pH 8.0 to pH 8.5 was excluded from the claimed use. The purpose of the claim read as follows: "for obtaining an immunoglobulin in monomeric form depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments". The purpose, i.e. the technical effect, had to be achievable for any immunoglobulin.

Also for a second medical use claim, in order for the requirement of sufficiency of disclosure to be met, a functional technical feature recited in the claim had to be plausibly achievable over the entire ambit of the claim based on the teaching of the patent and the common general knowledge.

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

The claim required the membrane anion-exchange chromatography material to be usable for obtaining any immunoglobulin in monomeric form within the pH range of pH 8.0 to pH 8.5 (see decision G 1/03, Reasons, point 2.5.2).

Due to the fundamental interaction between pI and pH and the relevance thereof in anion-exchange chromatography, the claimed invention, for a large portion of the scope, offended against generally accepted laws of physics and chemistry.

Non-working embodiments were part of the claimed subject-matter and the claim thus failed to meet the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

Auxiliary requests 1 to 8

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

Claim 1 of each of these requests failed to meet the requirements of Article 83 EPC for the same reasons as given for the invention in claim 1 of the main request.

XII. Respondent V's arguments are summarised below.

Main request - claim 1

Claim construction

The functional technical feature "for obtaining an immunoglobulin in monomeric form ..." constituted a limitation on the use of the membrane anion-exchange chromatography material. It identified a purpose which related to any immunoglobulin. If that purpose could not be achieved for some immunoglobulins, then these embodiments were not excluded from the claim, but the invention defined in the claim lacked sufficiency of disclosure.

In accordance with the case law, also for functionally limited claims it needed to be assessed whether the skilled person was able to obtain substantially all embodiments falling within the ambit of the claims.

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

The appellant had not challenged the opposition division's decision that not all immunoglobulins could be obtained in monomeric form under the conditions required by the claim, specifically the narrow

pH range.

Auxiliary requests 3 to 5

Admittance (Article 12(4) RPBA 2007)

The requests had been filed late.

Auxiliary requests 1 to 8 - claim 1

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

The limitations introduced did not overcome the deficiencies applying to the main request.

XIII. Respondent III's arguments are summarised below.

Referral of questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

The questions (see section VIII) were not relevant to the appellant's case.

XIV. Respondents II, IV and VI did not submit any arguments or requests during the appeal proceedings.

XV. The appellant requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be maintained in amended form based on the set of claims of the main request or, in the event of this request not being granted, that the questions as filed during the oral proceedings be referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal or, alternatively, that the patent be maintained in amended form based on the set of claims of one of auxiliary requests 1 to 8 (all claim requests having been filed with the statement of grounds of appeal).

Respondents I, III, V and VII requested that the appeal be dismissed. Respondent V furthermore requested that auxiliary requests 3 to 5 not be admitted into the appeal proceedings.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appeal complies with Articles 106 to 108 and

Rule 99 EPC and is admissible.

Background

2. It was common ground that the person skilled in the art knows the principles of ion exchange in general and anion exchange in particular (see, e.g., document D7, page 11, and document D25, page 322). There was a consensus that the person skilled in the art understands that, to obtain the immunoglobulin in monomeric form in the flow-through of the membrane anion-exchange chromatography material, the immunoglobulin must have a net neutral or net positive charge, whereas the immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments must have a net negative charge in order to be retained by the membrane anion-exchange chromatography material. The person skilled in the art furthermore knows that the charge state of a molecule is determined by its isoelectric point (pI) and that, at a pH that is greater than its pI, a molecule has a net negative charge, whereas, at a pH that is lower than its pI, the molecule has a net positive charge. The fact that immunoglobulins may differ in their pI values was likewise accepted to be generally known to the skilled person (see, e.g., Table of document D20, and document D30, page 153, right-hand column, first full paragraph).

Main request - claim 1

The claimed subject-matter - claim construction

3. The main issue of the case is the construction of the claim, the claim being identical to claim 1 of auxiliary request 1, underlying the decision under appeal. The opposition division held that the claim was directed to obtaining any immunoglobulin (having any pI value) in monomeric form.

4. The category of a claim and its technical features constitute its subject-matter (see decision G 2/88, OJ EPO 1990, 93, Reasons, point 2.6). The claim at issue is for the use of a known compound - "a membrane anion exchange chromatography material" - for a particular purpose - "obtaining an immunoglobulin in monomeric form depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments". The claim furthermore comprises the physical step of applying an aqueous, buffered solution with a pH from 8.0 to 8.5 and comprising an immunoglobulin in monomeric and in aggregated form and immunoglobulin fragments to said anion exchange chromatography material. Finally, the technical result of the claimed use is specified in the claim as a functional technical feature as follows: "whereby the immunoglobulin depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments is recovered from the flow-through of the anion exchange chromatography material and thereby an immunoglobulin in monomeric form is obtained".

5. It is evident from the preceding point that none of the technical features recited in the claim nor the wording of the claim restrict the term "immunoglobulin" technically. The claim is thus understood to concern the use of the membrane anion-exchange chromatography material for obtaining any immunoglobulin in monomeric form depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments by applying an aqueous, buffered solution with a pH from 8.0 to 8.5 comprising an immunoglobulin in monomeric and in aggregated form and immunoglobulin fragments to said anion-exchange chromatography material.

6. Relying on decision G 2/88 (supra, Reasons, points 9 and 9.1), the appellant argued as follows: in addition to the two functional limitations explicitly recited in the claim, i.e. the claimed purpose and the technical result, a further functional technical feature limiting the claim to particular immunoglobulins was to be implied based on the effect described in the patent "by way of legal construction" as a consequence of the claim being drafted in the format "new use of a known compound for a particular purpose". This additional functional technical feature excluded from the claim all immunoglobulins which could not be obtained in the desired form in the recited pH range of pH 8.0 to

pH 8.5 due to their unsuitable pI value.

7. In decision G 2/88 (supra, Reasons, points 1, 2.3, 9, 9.1 and 10.3 and Order, point (iii)) the Enlarged Board of Appeal addressed, inter alia, the proper interpretation of Article 54 EPC in relation to use-claims where the only novel feature was the purpose of such use and this purpose was stated in the claim. In that context the Enlarged Board held that a claim to the use of a known compound A for a particular

purpose B, which is based on a technical effect described in the patent, "should be interpreted (in appropriate cases) as also including as a technical feature the function of achieving purpose B, (because this is the technical result)" (G 2/88, supra, Reasons, point 9.1).

8. The board agrees with the appellant that claim construction needs to be the same regardless of whether novelty or sufficiency of disclosure is at stake. However, the board does not share the view of the appellant that the criteria developed in decision G 2/88 (supra, see point 7 above) can be relied upon to read into the claim at hand a further implicit functional technical feature limiting the claim to particular immunoglobulins having a "suitable pI". The board's reasoning in this respect is set out below.

9. As correctly pointed out by the respondents, according to decision G 2/88 (supra), the purpose of the use claim is limiting. In the claim at issue, the claimed purpose is the use of a membrane for "obtaining an immunoglobulin in monomeric form depleted of immunoglobulin aggregates and immunoglobulin fragments". Accordingly, this is the purpose that must be achieved for any and all immunoglobulins.

10. Construing the claim in accordance with the criteria developed in decision G 2/88 (supra, see point 7 above) has, in the board's view, the effect that the function of achieving that claimed purpose is implied in the claim as a functional technical feature, i.e. that any immunoglobulin is obtained in monomeric form in the recited pH range of pH 8.0 to pH 8.5. Since the claim at issue already explicitly recites the function of achieving the claimed purpose as an explicit functional technical feature anyway (see point 4 above), the claim at issue is in fact not further limited when applying the criteria of decision G 2/88 (supra).

11. The appellant's case rests on the premise that

decision G 2/88 (supra) requires that a functional technical feature, which reflects the technical effect actually described in the patent and which is less than the technical effect explicitly claimed, be implied in the claim as a "self-correcting" feature "by way of legal construction".

12. However, the legal fiction provided by G 2/88 (supra) is the inclusion - as a functional technical feature -of the function of achieving the claimed purpose (see point 7 above). On the other hand, no findings were made in decision G 2/88 (supra) with respect to the proper interpretation of use claims reciting a purpose that cannot be achieved over the whole ambit of the claim in view of the teaching of the patent and taking into account the common general knowledge of the skilled person.

13. In the board's view it is in particular not derivable from decision G 2/88 (supra) that an implicit limitation is to be read into the claim providing a "self-correcting mechanism" excluding non-working embodiments from the claim under consideration, if the claimed features fail to deliver the technical effect aimed for and if consequently the claimed purpose cannot be achieved across the whole ambit of the claim.

14. Furthermore, the board recalls that it is established in the case law of the boards of appeal - and the board agrees - that even limiting features explicitly mentioned in the description but not in the claims are not to be read into the claims (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 9th edition 2019, II.A.6.3.2 and II.A.6.3.4). In the case at hand, the limiting feature "suitable pI" is not even explicitly mentioned in the patent but would need to be inferred by the skilled person from the examples.

15. In a further line of argument the appellant submitted - while relying on interlocutory decision T 601/05 of 24 April 2008 (Reasons, point 6.5) and decision

T 1859/08 (Reasons, point 13) - that also this case law on medical use claims considered that non-working embodiments were excluded by way of "legal fiction/ self-correction" from purpose-restricted claims.

16. The board does not share the appellant's view. In point 6.5 of decision T 601/05 (supra) - the first decision considered by the appellant to provide evidence that a medical use claim was "self-corrected" to exclude non-working embodiments by way of legal construction - the board held that the pharmaceutical effect was a feature of the product claim at issue. It thus considered that "the question to be answered in the context of Article 56 EPC is not whether all the compositions covered by the claim are pharmaceutically useful since compositions not meeting this criterion are not encompassed by the claim due to its wording. Hence, the situation underlying decision T 939/92 is different and the decision is not applicable here."

17. In the relevant part of decision T 601/05 (supra), the board was concerned with the assessment of inventive step (Article 56 EPC) and more particularly with the issue of whether the objective technical problem was solved by the claimed subject-matter. The board distinguished between situations where the problem to be solved consisted in the achievement of an effect, which effect was stated in the claim, and situations where the problem to be solved consisted in achieving an effect, which effect was not stated in the claim, as in the case underlying decision T 939/92 (OJ EPO 1996, 309). It held that the question of whether or not all of the claimed compounds achieved the claimed effect arose only in the latter case. Since in the case dealt with by the board the effect was a feature of the claim, and compositions not pharmaceutically useful were thus not encompassed by that claim, decision

T 939/92 was not applicable. Therefore, the question of whether the problem was solved by the claimed subject-matter did not arise.

18. However, this is not the same as holding that non-working embodiments are excluded from the claim by way of legal fiction or that the claim is "self-correcting", as asserted by the appellant. Indeed, in the subsequent decision, decision T 601/05 of 2 December 2009 (see Reasons, points 33 to 44), the same board held for the same claim - that was considered in the earlier interlocutory decision T 601/05 (supra) - that a whole class of compounds falling under the terms of the claim could not be produced on the basis of the teaching in the patent. This did not have the consequence that these embodiments were excluded by way of legal fiction from the claim. Instead, the board held that the skilled person could not carry out the claimed invention over the breadth of claim 1 with the consequence that the requirements of Article 83 EPC were not fulfilled.

19. In the second decision relied on by the appellant, decision T 1859/08, the claim at issue was a second medical use claim for the "Use of an anti-ErbB2 antibody in the preparation of a medicament for treatment to provide clinical benefit as measured by increased time to disease progression of malignant breast cancer characterised by overexpression of ErbB2 in a human patient (...)". The board held that the claim "includes, as a technical feature of the claim, the achievement of a clinical benefit in breast cancer patients as measured by an increased time to disease progression" (see Reasons, point 13).

20. It is indeed established case law of the boards of appeal that, when a therapeutic application is claimed in the form of a second medical use claim, attaining the claimed therapeutic effect is a functional technical feature of the claim (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 9th edition 2019, section II.C.7.2 and decision T 609/02 cited therein). Decision T 1859/08 is in line with that case law.

21. It is furthermore also established in the case law that, if the claimed therapeutic effect is not achieved over the whole ambit of the claim, then there is a lack of sufficiency of disclosure (see G 1/03, OJ EPO 2004, 413; Reasons, point 2.5.2 and decision T 609/02, Reasons, point 9). The board cannot deduce from these principles any basis for a "self-correcting" effect by way of a legal fiction such that embodiments not achieving the claimed effect are not covered by the claim.

22. Finally, the board notes that the case at hand is not concerned with the applicability of the criteria developed in decision G 2/88 (supra, see point 7 above) to the claim at issue. What is in dispute is the consequence of the application of those criteria to the claim at issue (see points 11 to 13 above). The appellant's reliance on case law confirming that decision G 2/88 (supra) is applicable to use claims (section I.C.8.1.3 of the CLBA) therefore does not assist its case. Furthermore, none of the decisions recited in that section of the CLBA was relied on by the appellant in support of its argument as to a "self-correction" mechanism excluding non-working embodiments from the claim.

23. In view of the above considerations, the limitation invoked by the appellant cannot be read into claim 1. Indeed, the board agrees with the opposition division and the respondents that the claim is not limited to the use of a membrane anion-exchange chromatography material for obtaining immunoglobulins having a suitable pI in monomeric form. Instead, it is understood to be directed to the use of a membrane anion-exchange chromatography material for obtaining any immunoglobulin in monomeric form. The claim thus requires that the technical effect be obtained for all immunoglobulins and not only for immunoglobulins having a suitable pI by applying "an aqueous, buffered solution comprising an immunoglobulin in monomeric and in aggregated form and immunoglobulin fragments to said anion exchange chromatography material, wherein the aqueous, buffered solution has a pH value of from pH 8.0 to pH 8.5".

Request for referral of questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (Article 112(1)(a) EPC)

24. Pursuant to Article 112(1)(a) EPC, the boards of appeal refer questions to the Enlarged Board either of their own motion or upon request from a party, in order to ensure uniform application of the law or if a point of law of fundamental importance arises, if they consider that a decision is required for the above purposes and if the answer to that question is relevant for deciding the case in question.

25. The appellant requested the referral of two questions filed during the oral proceedings (see section VIII above for the exact formulation) to the Enlarged Board of Appeal.

26. The board understands that the first question asks whether the legal fiction provided by decision G 2/88 (supra) is only relevant for novelty and not for sufficiency of disclosure. In view of point 8 above, this question is irrelevant.

27. Since the board does not distinguish between functional technical features explicitly mentioned in the claim and functional technical features that are implied (see point 10 above), the second question is likewise irrelevant.

28. The requirements for a referral are not therefore fulfilled. Accordingly, the board decided to reject the appellant's request.

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

29. Article 83 EPC requires that the application disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be carried out by a person skilled in the art. It is established case law of the boards of appeal that the application must contain sufficient information to allow a person skilled in the art, using common general knowledge, to carry out the invention within the whole area that is claimed (see CLBA, section II.C.5.4). In other words, the skilled person has to be able to obtain substantially all embodiments falling within the ambit of the claim.

30. The appellant did not dispute the fact that not all immunoglobulins can be separated within the narrow pH range recited in the claim. It submitted, as its main line of argument, that the skilled person could carry out the claimed invention with immunoglobulins having a suitable pI whereas non-working embodiments were excluded from the claim by way of legal construction.

31. This line of argument cannot succeed in view of the claim construction adopted by the board (see point 23 above).

32. The appellant's further argument, namely that the description contained sufficient information regarding the relevant criteria for finding appropriate alternatives having a suitable pI, likewise fails.

33. It is required that appropriate alternatives be available over the claimed range (see

decision G 1/03, supra, Reasons, point 2.5.2). In the case at hand, this means for the use of a membrane anion-exchange chromatography material for obtaining any immunoglobulin in monomeric form, irrespective of the immunoglobulin's pI (see point 23 above).

34. The board concludes from the above considerations, in line with the decision under appeal, that the claimed subject-matter comprises non-working embodiments and that the patent with the set of claims of the main request thus fails to meet the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

Auxiliary requests 1 to 8

Consideration of auxiliary requests 3 to 5

35. The admittance of auxiliary requests 3 to 5 was contested by respondent V. However, in view of the board's conclusion on the issue of sufficiency of disclosure (see below), there is no need for the board to give reasons for considering all auxiliary claim requests in substance.

Sufficiency of disclosure (Article 83 EPC)

36. Claim 1 of auxiliary requests 1 to 8 pertains to the use of a membrane anion-exchange chromatography material for obtaining an immunoglobulin, a monoclonal immunoglobulin or a monoclonal antibody (depending on the claim request) in monomeric form depleted of aggregates and fragments.

37. None of the amendments made have any effect on the construction of claim 1 of auxiliary requests 1 to 8. The observations set out above for claim 1 of the main request (see points 29 to 34) thus apply, mutatis mutandis, to claim 1 of auxiliary requests 1 to 8. In fact, the appellant accepted the finding that the requirements of Article 83 EPC are not met if the claim construction is the same as for the main request.

38. The board concludes that the claimed subject-matter comprises non-working embodiments and that the patent with the set of claims of each of auxiliary requests 1 to 8 thus fails to meet the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

Dispositif

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The request to refer questions of law to the

Enlarged Board of Appeal is rejected.

2. The appeal is dismissed.

Footer - Service & support
  • Soutien
    • Mises à jour du site Internet
    • Disponibilité de services en ligne
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Notifications relatives aux procédures
    • Contact
    • Centre d'abonnement
    • Jours fériés
    • Glossaire
Footer - More links
  • Centre de presse
  • Emploi et carrière
  • Single Access Portal
  • Achats
  • Chambres de recours
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Adresse bibliographique
  • Conditions d’utilisation
  • Protection des données
  • Accessibilité

Nous utilisons des cookies

Nous utilisons des cookies sur notre site Internet afin de soutenir desfonctionnalités techniques qui améliorent votre expérience utilisateur. Il utilise également des fonctions d'analyse.

Pour regarder des vidéos sur notre site Internet, vous devez accepter les cookies YouTube. Pour plus d'informations, veuillez consulter la politique de confidentialité de YouTube.