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 0755/16 02-02-2022
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0755/16 02-02-2022

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T075516.20220202
Date of decision
02 February 2022
Case number
T 0755/16
Petition for review of
-
Application number
08784774.5
IPC class
C07K 16/00
C07K 1/34
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD CHAIRMEN (C)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 430.08 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

VARIABLE TANGENTIAL FLOW FILTRATION

Applicant name
F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG
Opponent name
Baxter Healthcare S.A.
Board
3.3.02
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 56
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(2)
Keywords

Inventive step

Amendment to appeal case

Amendment after summons

Late-filed facts

Late-filed objection

Catchword
A request not to admit a certain document, this request having been filed for the first time during oral proceedings before the board, may constitute an amendment of the appeal case the admittance of which is governed by Article 13(2) RPBA 2020 (point 3 of the reasons)
Cited decisions
-
Citing decisions
T 1774/21

I. The appeals by the opponent and the patent proprietor lie from the opposition division's interlocutory decision that European patent No. 2 170 949 in amended form according to the then pending auxiliary request 2, which had been filed during the oral proceedings, met the requirements of the EPC.

II. The then pending auxiliary request 2 contained eleven claims, claim 1 of which read as follows:

"1. Method for concentrating an immunoglobulin solution by tangential flow filtration, characterized in that the transmembrane pressure and the cross-flow are variable and changed during the filtration process depending on the immunoglobulin concentration with

i) a transmembrane pressure of from 1.4 bar to 1.6 bar and a cross-flow of from 225 liters/m**(2)/h to 270 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range up to 30 mg immunoglobulin per ml of solution to be concentrated,

ii) a transmembrane pressure of from 0.8 bar to 0.9 bar and a cross-flow of from 420 liters/m**(2)/h to 480 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range of from 15 mg/ml up to 55 mg/ml,

iii) a transmembrane pressure of from 0.8 bar to 0.9 bar and a cross-flow of from 360 liters/m**(2)/h to 420 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range of from 50 mg/ml up to 275 mg/ml,

wherein the actual concentration of the immunoglobulin in the solution to be concentrated determines the applied transmembrane pressure and cross-flow and the transmembrane pressure and cross-flow are adjusted depending on the actual concentration of the immunoglobulin;

and wherein the membrane area is 0.02 m**(2)."

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

D4 |Luo, R. et al., BioProcess International (2006), pp. 44-46 |

A018|Expert declaration by Dr. Wolfgang Teschner of 1 June 2016 |

A028|Third expert declaration by Dr. Wolfgang Teschner |

A029|Biotek - Application Note: Paul Held, "Rapid Critical Micelle Concentration (CMC) Determination Using Fluorescence Polarization" |

A030|Scientific & Technical Report - Pall Corporation: Diafiltration: "A Fast, Efficient Method for Desalting, or Buffer Exchange of Biological Samples"|

A031|Platts, L. and Falconer, R.J. (2015) "Controlling protein stability: Mechanisms revealed using formulations of arginine, glycine and guanidinium HCl with three globular proteins", International Journal ofPharmaceutics, 486 (1-2), pp. 131-135|

A032|Masato Kiyoshi et al. (2019), "Collaborative Study for Analysis of Subvisible Particles Using Flow Imaging and Light Obscuration: Experiences in Japanese Biopharmaceutical Consortium" Journal of PharmaceuticalSciences, 2019 (108), pp. 832-841|

A033|Eurofins - "Particulate Matter and Particle Size Testing" |

A034|USP <788> "Particulate Matter in Injections" |

A035|Mutschler Arzneimittelwirkungen, Lehrbuch der Pharmakologie und Toxikologie, 2001, 8, Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, p. 913 |

A036|Migone et al., "Raxibacumab for the Treatment of Inhalational Anthrax", July 9, New Engl J Med 2009; 361, 2, pp. 135-144 |

IV. The opposition division came, inter alia, to the conclusion that claim 1 of the then pending auxiliary request 2 involved an inventive step.

V. In its statement setting out the grounds of appeal, the opponent submitted document A018 (denoted D16 by the opponent).

VI. Since the opponent and the patent proprietor were both appellant and respondent in the present appeal proceedings, they are referred to in the following as "patent proprietor" and "opponent".

VII. The board issued a communication in preparation for the oral proceedings which had been scheduled as requested by the parties.

VIII. Oral proceedings before the board were held by videoconference on 2 February 2022.

IX. The parties' final requests were as follows:

The opponent requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be revoked.

The patent proprietor requested that:

- the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be maintained on the basis of the claims of the main request, filed with the letter of 1 December 2016,

- or, alternatively, that it be maintained on the basis of one of the claim sets of auxiliary requests 1 to 6, filed with the letter of 1 December 2016, or of auxiliary request 7, filed during the oral proceedings before the board.

X. The opponent's case, where relevant to the present decision, may be summarised as follows:

Inventive step

- The distinguishing features of the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 as regards D4 as the closest prior art were that the transmembrane pressure (TMP) and the cross-flow were adjusted stepwise during the filtration process with regard to the immunoglobulin concentrations achieved during the process.

- Document A018 showed that the effect relied on by the patent proprietor was not achieved over the whole scope of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4.

- The objective technical problem was the provision of an alternative tangential flow filtration (TFF) method.

- The arbitrary selection of TMP and cross-flow values was not regarded as having inventive merit.

- The subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 did not involve an inventive step.

- The same objection applied to the claims of auxiliary requests 1 to 6.

Admittance of the patent proprietor's request not to admit A018 into the proceedings

- The patent proprietor's request was late-filed and should not be admitted into the proceedings according to Article 13(2) RPBA 2020. A018 was submitted with the statement of grounds of appeal filed in 2016. The patent proprietor should have objected to the admittance of A018 at an earlier stage of the appeal proceedings. The patent proprietor had not justified the late-filing.

Admittance of the allegation of fact that firstly, experiment 1 of A018 is outside of the scope of claim 1 because the immunoglobulin concentration ranges are not respected and secondly, due to this, experiment 1 cannot prove that a process according to claim 1 does not lead to any effect

- The patent proprietor's allegation had not been advanced in the written proceedings. If the board would admit it, the opponent would have additional sufficiency objections.

Admittance of auxiliary request 7

- The set of claims of auxiliary request 7 should not be admitted into the proceedings according to Article 13(2) RPBA 2020. The auxiliary request could have been filed earlier. Exceptional circumstances as required by Article 13(2) RPBA were absent.

XI. The patent proprietor's case, where relevant to the present decision, may be summarised as follows:

Inventive step

- The distinguishing features of the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 as regards D4 as the closest prior art were that the TMP and the cross-flow were adjusted stepwise during the filtration process with regard to the immunoglobulin concentrations achieved during the process.

- The examples of the patent showed that fewer agglomerates in a certain processing time or the same number of agglomerates in a shorter processing time was achieved. No other conclusion could be reached in light of opponent's data in A018.

- Thus, the objective technical problem was the provision of a TFF method resulting in fewer agglomerates in a certain processing time or the same number of agglomerates in a shorter processing time.

- In view of this problem, the claimed solution was not rendered obvious by D4 or the further cited prior art.

- The subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 involved an inventive step.

Admittance of the patent proprietor's request not to admit A018 into the proceedings

- The patent proprietor's request not to admit A018 into the proceedings, although not filed earlier, should be admitted into the proceedings according to Article 13(2) RPBA 2020.

Admittance of the allegation of fact that firstly, experiment 1 of A018 is outside of the scope of claim 1 because the immunoglobulin concentration ranges are not respected and secondly, due to this, experiment 1 cannot prove that a process according to claim 1 does not lead to any effect

- The patent proprietor's allegation of fact should be admitted into the appeal proceedings.

- The allegation had been advanced in the reply to the grounds of appeal (paragraph a3) on page 15) and therefore did not constitute an amendment to its case.

Admittance of auxiliary request 7

- The set of claims of auxiliary request 7 was in response to the conclusion of the board concerning the relevance of the experiments of A018. These conclusions did not apply to the subject-matter claimed in auxiliary request 7.

Admittance of documents A028 to A036

- Documents A028 to A036 should not be admitted into the appeal proceedings.

As during the oral proceedings the issue of inventive step was discussed in the context of auxiliary request 4 and as the board's conclusions were only later during the oral proceedings applied to higher ranking claim requests, the board will first address this auxiliary request in these reasons.

Auxiliary request 4

1. The subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 corresponds to the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 2, which was considered by the opposition division in its decision (II, supra).

The claim relates to a method of concentrating an immunoglobulin solution by tangential flow filtration (TFF). The method is characterised in that a specific applied transmembrane pressure (TMP) and a specific cross-flow are adjusted stepwise during the filtration process, depending on the immunoglobulin concentration:

Immunoglobulin concentration(mg/ml)|Transmembrane pressure(bar)|Cross-flow(litres/m**(2)/h)|

up to 30 |1.4-1.6|225-270|

15-55 |0.8-0.9|420-480|

50 up to 275|0.8-0.9|360-420|

Inventive step

2. The opponent objected to the inventive step of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 in view of D4 as the closest prior art. It relied on document A018.

3. Admittance of the patent proprietor's request not to admit A018 into the proceedings

During the oral proceedings, the patent proprietor requested that A018 not be admitted into the proceedings.

A018 was submitted by the opponent with the statement of grounds of appeal and comprises two experiments relating to a method of concentrating an immunoglobulin solution by TFF. These experiments were discussed by the patent proprietor in its reply to the grounds of appeal (point 4). The patent proprietor objected to the admittance of A018 neither in its reply to the grounds of appeal nor in its subsequent letters. The request not to admit A018 thus represented an amendment to the patent proprietor's case. The admittance of the request is governed by Article 13(2) RPBA 2020, which applies to the case at hand in accordance with the transitional provisions set out in Article 25(3) RPBA 2020 (the summons to oral proceedings was notified after 1 January 2020).

In accordance with Article 13(2) RPBA 2020, any amendment to a party's appeal case made after notification of a summons to oral proceedings shall, in principle, not be taken into account unless there are exceptional circumstances which have been justified with cogent reasons by the party concerned.

Since A018 was filed with the statement of grounds of appeal, its admittance could have been objected to before the oral proceedings. The board sees no reason, and no reason has been cited by the patent proprietor, why this was not done. There are thus no exceptional circumstances which could justify the request made by the patent proprietor during the oral proceedings.

For these reasons, the board has decided not to admit the patent proprietor's request into the proceedings in accordance with Article 13(2) RPBA 2020.

4. The aim of the patent is to improve flux performance (shorten the overall concentration time) and to reduce aggregate formation (paragraphs [0029] and [0034] of the patent) in a method of concentrating an immunoglobulin solution. A reduced aggregate formation correlates with a higher quality product.

D4 relates to a method for concentrating monoclonal antibodies. The method involves the use of a tangential flow mini-cassette (first full paragraph in the right-hand column on page 44 of D4), implying a TFF process. D4 does not refer to immunoglobulin. However, since immunoglobulin is a monoclonal antibody, the aim of D4 is similar to that of the patent in suit.

Thus, D4 constitutes a suitable closest prior art document in the assessment of the inventive step of the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4.

5. Distinguishing features

D4 discloses a process wherein the TMP and the cross-flow are selected depending on the initial concentration of the antibody in the solution to be concentrated ("Results and Discussion" on page 45). During this process, the TMP and cross-flow are kept constant. Hence, no stepwise adjustment of the TMP and cross-flow during the process is disclosed.

As was common ground between the parties, the distinguishing feature of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 in view of D4 is thus that the TMP and the cross-flow are adjusted stepwise during the filtration process depending on the immunoglobulin concentration.

6. Objective technical problem

Based on the effect shown in the examples of the patent (comparative methods 1 to 4 compared to method 5 according to claim 1 of auxiliary request 4), the patent proprietor formulated the objective technical problem as being the provision of a TFF method resulting in fewer agglomerates in a certain processing time or the same number of agglomerates in a shorter processing time.

The board does not agree with this formulation of the objective technical problem. As submitted by the opponent, A018 shows that the technical problem as formulated by the patent proprietor is not solved over the whole scope of claim 1 for the following reasons.

Document A018 comprises two experiments. Experiment 1 ("variable method") is a process for concentrating immunoglobulin, comprising a TFF process carried out under variable conditions as follows:

Immunoglobulin concentrationin mg/ml|Transmembrane pressurein bar|Cross-flowin ml/min (litres/m**(2)/h)|

up to 30 |1.5 |85-96 (255-288) |

15-55 |0.85 |159-160 (477-480)|

more than 45|0.85 |131-133 (393-399)|

The total aggregate amount ("Total particles" in the table on page 4 of A018) is 9 539 783 and the immunoglobulin concentration ("Protein (%)") achieved in 212 min (3h32 min) in experiment 1 is 7.8% (78 mg/ml).

Experiment 2 of A018 is a TFF process carried out under constant conditions: the cross-flow (retentate flow) was maintained at 120-133 ml/min, the feed pressure at 1.0-1.2 bar and the TMP at 0.85 bar.

The total aggregate amount and the immunoglobulin concentration achieved in experiment 2 in 200 min are 11 537 461 and 9.7% (97 mg/ml, table on page 6 of A018), respectively.

The hypothetical time for achieving an immunoglobulin concentration of experiment 2, 9.7%, using the variable conditions of experiment 1 would be more than 212 min (time for achieving a concentration of 7.8%) and is thus longer than the time for achieving the same protein concentration under constant conditions (i.e. 200 min for experiment 2).

A comparison of experiment 1 (using variable conditions) with experiment 2 (using constant conditions) thus reveals that the effect relied upon by the patent proprietor in formulating the objective technical problem is not present over the entire scope of claim 1.

The patent proprietor first of all submitted, based on its technical expert's declarations A019 and A026 and documents A020 to A023, that experiments 1 and 2 of A018 did not reach the same degree of immunoglobulin concentration and that it was not possible to compare the total aggregate amount and the processing time between experiments 1 and 2.

The board is not convinced by the patent proprietor's argument.

It is to be expected that, if experiment 1, which was carried out until an immunoglobulin concentration of 78 mg/ml was reached, had been continued until the same immunoglobulin concentration as in experiment 2 (97 mg/ml) was reached, the total aggregate amount would have further increased such that it would have been higher than the one reported for experiment 2 (11 537 461). More specifically, even if it were accepted that no new agglomerates are formed during this continuation of experiment 1, the aggregate amount in mg/ml, which in fact is an aggregate concentration, would still have increased. This is due to the fact that by increasing the immunoglobulin concentration during the continuation of experiment 1 from 78 mg/ml to 97 mg/ml, the total volume is reduced by 12% and therefore the aggregate concentration would increase by 12% and, thus, would be 11.8 x 10**(6)(9 539 783 x 1.12). This is higher than the total aggregate amount achieved by experiment 2 (11 537 461).

Thus, a comparison of experiments 1 and 2 shows that a longer process time is required by experiment 1 (using variable conditions) to achieve the same immunoglobulin concentration as experiment 2 (using constant conditions). Furthermore, by applying this longer process time until the same immunoglobulin concentration is obtained, a higher and thus disadvantageous total aggregate amount would result.

Second, the patent proprietor submitted that experiments 1 and 2 in A018 were performed in the presence of glycine as a stabilising additive. Such an additive was not present in the examples of the patent. In addition, the TFF system used in A018 was not the same as that used in the examples of the patent. Since the experimental conditions were different from those in the patent, no conclusion could be drawn from the comparison between the results of A018 and the examples of the patent.

This argument must fail since the above conclusion that the effect relied upon by the patent proprietor is not obtained over the entire scope of claim 1 is not based on any comparison between the results in A018 with those in the patent. On the contrary, what has been compared are two results (experiments 1 and 2) within A018. And these two experiments of A018 were carried out under the same conditions (inter alia with the same additive (glycine) and the same TFF system) and only differed from one another by the distinguishing feature over D4, i.e. in that the TMP and the cross-flow are adjusted stepwise in experiment 1.

Third, the patent proprietor submitted that the cross-flow of the first step of experiment 1 (85-96 ml/min, 255-288 litres/m**(2)/h) was not within the range required by step i) of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 (225-270 litres/m**(2)/h) but instead simply overlapped it. For that reason, experiment 1 was not in accordance with claim 1. Experiment 1 could thus not prove that the effect relied upon by the patent proprietor was not obtained over the whole scope claimed.

The board does not agree. It is not credible in view of the small difference between the range of 255-288 litres/m**(2)/h in experiment 1 and the range of 225-270 litres/m**(2)/h as required by claim 1 that changing the cross-flow from that in experiment 1 to that defined in claim 1 would change the result obtained in experiment 1 to such an extent that the above conclusion based on the comparison between experiments 1 and 2 would no longer be valid.

6.1 Since the effect relied upon by the patent proprietor is thus not achieved over the entire scope of claim 1, the objective technical problem has to be formulated in a less ambitious way as the provision of an alternative TFF method.

7. Obviousness

The arbitrary selection of TMP and cross-flow values during the process as defined in claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 cannot be regarded as having inventive merit. Such an arbitrary selection implies nothing more than a routine adjustment of these two process parameters. For that reason, the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 does not involve an inventive step.

7.1 Admittance of the allegation of fact that firstly, experiment 1 of A018 is outside of the scope of claim 1 because the immunoglobulin concentration ranges are not respected and secondly, due to this, experiment 1 cannot prove that a process according to claim 1 does not lead to any effect

During the oral proceedings, the patent proprietor submitted that experiment 1 of A018 was not in accordance with claim 1 since the immunoglobulin concentration ranges according to claim 1 had not been respected in the process described in experiment 1. More specifically, it submitted that the third step in experiment 1 was carried out under a TMP of 0.85 bar and a cross-flow of 131 to 133 ml/min after a concentration of immunoglobulin of more than 4.49%, corresponding to a concentration of 44.9 mg/ml. This concentration in experiment 1 was lower than the concentration required by step iii) of claim 1, which was from 50 to 275 mg/ml. For that reason, experiment 1 was not in accordance with claim 1 and could not constitute proof that a process according to claim 1 did not lead to any effect.

The patent proprietor's submission represents an allegation of fact which again amends the patent proprietor's appeal case.

As set out above, the admittance of any amendment to a party's appeal case after notification of a summons to oral proceedings is governed by Article 13(2) RPBA 2020. Such amendments must not be taken into account unless there are exceptional circumstances which have been justified with cogent reasons by the party concerned.

The patent proprietor argued that the above submission was already made in the reply to the grounds of appeal (paragraph a3) on page 15) and therefore did not constitute an amendment to its case.

The board does not agree.

The heading of paragraph a3) on page 15 of the reply to the grounds of appeal reads "The parameters used in E1 and E2 do not match the values in the granted patent", E1 and E2 being experiments 1 and 2 of A018. The only parameter discussed in that context was the cross-flow required by the first step of the process of claim 1 ("The stated upper limit of the claimed crossflow range is 90 ml/min. In contrast, the actual retentate flow reported in E1 is 85-96 ml/min."). There is, however, in that paragraph of the reply to the grounds of appeal neither an explicit nor an implicit reference to the difference between the immunoglobulin concentration of experiment 1 and that required in step iii) of claim 1.

Thus, the allegation of fact identified above did represent an amendment to the patent proprietor's case.

As set out above, A018 and with it experiments 1 and 2 were filed by the opponent with its statement of grounds of appeal. The patent proprietor could thus have criticised these two experiments at an earlier stage of the appeal proceedings. No reason is apparent to the board, and neither was one cited by the patent proprietor, as to why the patent proprietor's submission was not presented until during the oral proceedings before the board. There are thus no exceptional circumstances justifying the admittance of this submission.

For these reasons, the board has decided not to admit the allegation of fact identified above into the appeal proceedings in accordance with Article 13(2) RPBA 2020.

Main request and auxiliary requests 1 to 3, 5 and 6

8. Claim 1 of the main request reads as follows:

"1. Method for concentrating an immunoglobulin solution by tangential flow filtration, characterized in that the transmembrane pressure and the cross-flow are variable and changed during the filtration process depending on the immunoglobulin concentration with

i) a transmembrane pressure of from 1.4 bar to 1.6 bar and a cross-flow of from 225 liters/m**(2)/h to 270 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range up to 30 mg immunoglobulin per ml of solution to be concentrated,

ii) a transmembrane pressure of from 0.8 bar to 0.9 bar and a cross-flow of from 420 liters/m**(2)/h to 480 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range of from 15 mg/ml up to 55 mg/ml,

iii) a transmembrane pressure of from 0.8 bar to 0.9 bar and a cross-flow of from 360 liters/m**(2)/h to 420 liters/m**(2)/h in a concentration range of from 50 mg/ml up to 275 mg/ml,

wherein the actual concentration of the immunoglobulin in the solution to be concentrated determines the applied transmembrane pressure and cross-flow and the transmembrane pressure and cross-flow are adjusted depending on the actual concentration of the immunoglobulin."

9. Claim 1 of auxiliary request 1 corresponds to claim 1 of the main request, except that the cross-flow values are expressed in ml/min and it has been specified that "the cross-flow is in ml/min for a membrane area of 0.02 m**(2)".

10. Claim 1 of auxiliary request 2 corresponds to claim 1 of the main request, except that the cross-flow has been specified to be 240, 450 and 390 litres/m**(2)/h in steps i), ii) and iii), respectively.

11. Claim 1 of auxiliary request 3 corresponds to a combination of claims 1 and 2 of auxiliary request 2, i.e. the transmembrane pressure has been specified to be 1.5 or 0.85 bar in steps i), ii) and iii).

12. Claim 1 of auxiliary request 5 corresponds to claim 1 as granted, except that it has been specified that "the membrane area is 0.02 m**(2)".

13. The claims of auxiliary request 6 correspond to the claims as granted.

14. During the oral proceedings, the patent proprietor did not dispute that if the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 lacked an inventive step, the same objection applied to all claim requests on file.

Thus, the board has concluded that the subject-matter of claim 1 of the main request and of each of auxiliary requests 1 to 3, 5 and 6 does not involve an inventive step in view of D4 for the same reasons as those given for the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4.

15. Admittance of auxiliary request 7

15.1 Auxiliary request 7 was filed during the oral proceedings before the board.

Claim 1 of auxiliary request 7 is a combination of claims 1 and 3 of auxiliary request 4.

15.2 The opponent requested that auxiliary request 7 not be admitted into the appeal proceedings in line with Article 13(2) RPBA 2020.

15.3 The patent proprietor submitted that the claim set according to auxiliary request 7 was filed in response to the conclusion of the board concerning the relevance of the experiments reported in A018.

However A018 and the relevance of the experiments reported therein were already discussed in the patent proprietor's reply to the statement of grounds of appeal. Obviously it could be expected that the board might hold the experiments relevant in spite of the patent proprietor's arguments. Thus, the board's conclusions which essentially follow the arguments of the opponent cannot be seen as a convincing reason to file a further auxiliary request.

Hence, no convincing justification for the submission of the claim set according to auxiliary request 7 at this late stage of the appeal proceedings was provided by the patent proprietor.

15.4 In view of the above, the board has decided not to admit auxiliary request 7 into the appeal proceedings in accordance with Article 13(2) RPBA 2020.

16. Admittance of documents A028 to A036

Documents A028 to A036 were submitted by the opponent with its letter of 6 December 2021.

The patent proprietor requested that these documents not be admitted into the proceedings.

During the oral proceedings, the board decided not to admit these documents into the proceedings. As set out above, the subject-matter of claim 1 of the main request and of auxiliary requests 1 to 6 was found not to involve an inventive step in view of D4 as the closest prior art, even disregarding documents A028 to A036. The decision on inventive step is thus in the opponent's favour, and therefore there is no need to provide reasons for the non-admittance of the opponent's documents.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.

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