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 0077/18 (Dental composite / KERR CORPORATION) 21-01-2022
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0077/18 (Dental composite / KERR CORPORATION) 21-01-2022

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T007718.20220121
Date of decision
21 January 2022
Case number
T 0077/18
Petition for review of
-
Application number
03254200.3
IPC class
A61K 6/00
A61K 6/083
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
DISTRIBUTED TO BOARD CHAIRMEN (C)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 384.99 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

Prepolymerized filler in dental restorative composite

Applicant name
Kerr Corporation
Opponent name
RPE GmbH
Board
3.3.07
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 54
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention Art 100(c)
Keywords

Novelty - implicit disclosure (no)

Inventive step - (yes)

Grounds for opposition - late-filed ground for opposition

Catchword
The respondent's requests regarding the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC confront the Board with the issue of admittance of a new ground for opposition which was raised during the oral proceedings before the opposition division but had deliberately not been decided upon by the opposition division. In the absence of a positive decision on admittance by the opposition division, the Board considers that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC should be treated as a fresh ground at the appeal stage and its admittance should be governed by the principles set forth in G 10/91, which require the proprietor's consent for its introduction in the appeal proceedings. In view of the appellant's refusal thereto, the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) is not to be introduced in the appeal proceedings.
Cited decisions
G 0010/91
Citing decisions
-

I. European patent 1 396 254 ("the patent") was granted on the basis of thirty-one claims.

The independent claim 1 as granted related to:

"A dental composite comprising a polymerizable resin base and 10% by volume to 80% by volume filler comprising a ground structural filler, a prepolymerized filler, and a nanofiller,

wherein the structural filler comprises between 10% by volume and 70% by volume of the composite and consists of particles that have been ground to a mean particle size between 0.05 µm and 0.50 µm, wherein the ground structural filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter,

wherein the prepolymerized filler comprises at least 1% by volume of the composite and consists of an inorganic portion and a polymerized organic resin portion,

and wherein the nanofiller comprises at least 0.01% by volume of the composite, the nanofiller comprising discrete, non-aggregated particles of mean particle size less than 100 nm."

Claim 17 as granted related to:

"A method of making a dental composite paste for use in restoring a tooth, the method comprising

preparing a prepolymerized filler by mixing an inorganic filler with an organic polymerizable resin, curing the mixture, and then grinding the cured mixture,

providing a structural filler consisting of particles that have been ground to a mean particle size between 0.05 mym and 0.50 mym, wherein the ground structural filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 mym in diameter,

providing a discrete nanofiller comprising discrete, non-aggregated particles of mean particle size less than 100 nm,

mixing the structural filler, prepolymerized filler and discrete nanofiller with a polymerizable resin base to form a dental composite paste having a total filler loading between 10% by volume and 80% by volume,

wherein the structural filler comprises between 10% by volume and 70% by volume of the composite paste, the prepolymerized filler comprises at least 1 % by volume of the composite paste, and the discrete nanofiller comprises at least 0.01 % by volume of the composite paste."

II. The patent was opposed on the grounds that the claimed subject-matter was not new and lacked an inventive step under Article 100 a) EPC. The appeal was filed by the patent proprietor against the decision of the opposition division to revoke the patent.

The decision was based on the main request relating to the patent as granted and auxiliary requests 1-6 submitted during the oral proceedings held on 15 September 2017.

In its decision the opposition division cited inter alia the following documents:

D1 : JP2000-080013 (English machine translation)

D2 : JPH05-194135 (English machine translation)

D8a : Technical Bulletin Pigments: Basic Characteristics of Aerosil, Number 11, 5th edition, 1997 (Degussa, Germany)

D11 : EP-A-1 005 911

The opposition division came to the following conclusions:

(a) The subject-matter of claim 1 of the patent as granted was not new in view of document D1. Examples 6 and 7 of this document described dental composites comprising methacrylate or acrylate monomer as polymerizable resin base, a strontium glass powder with a mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym as structural filler, an organic-inorganic composite as prepolymerized filler and Aerosil R972 as nanofiller. From document D8a, page 27 Figure 22 it was concluded that Aerosil R972 comprised discrete primary particles, aggregates and agglomerates. Document D1 further mentioned grinding for the preparation of glass powders. The feature of less than 50% by volume of particles being larger than 0.5mym was implicit in the definition of the mean size of the particles in document D1. The amounts of the components expressed in document D1 as concentration in weight percentage fell within the ranges for the amounts defined in the patent in percentage by volume concentrations taking account of expected values of the densities of the components.

(b) Amended claim 14 of auxiliary request 1 introduced a feature regarding the limited shrinkage of the composite upon curring which was not clear. The same objection applied with respect to auxiliary requests 2 and 3.

(c) Claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 was not objectionable under Articles 123 and 84 EPC. The subject-matter of this claim was new over document D1 due to the further definition of the particle size distribution of the prepolymerized filler.

No effect of this differentiating feature with respect to the exemplified composites of document D1 had been shown. The objective technical problem was seen in the provision of an alternative dental composite.

To the skilled person the defined subject-matter would be obvious as solution in view of the teaching in documents D1 and D2. These documents described prepolymerized fillers for dental composites with a mean particle size of up to 50 mym. The particles with the size distribution defined in claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 represented an arbitrary and therefore obvious selection. Accordingly, the subject-matter of claim 1 of auxiliary request 4 did not involve a inventive step.

(d) The subject-matter of Claim 1 of auxiliary requests 5 and 6 did not involve an inventive step for the same reason as set out for claim 1 of auxiliary request 4.

III. The following additional documents have inter alia been cited during the appeal procedure:

D1a: US6221931

D1b: Partial English manual translation of JP2000-080013 Document D1a, the US equivalent of JP2000-080013, was cited by the appellant in the statement of grounds of appeal. Document D1b was filed by the respondent with its letter of 20 December 2021.| IV. With the statement of grounds of appeal the appellant filed auxiliary requests 1-12. In its reply to the appeal the respondent requested that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC be considered in the appeal proceedings. In its letter of 16 October 2019 the appellant denied consent to the introduction of this ground for opposition.|

V. In a communication pursuant to Article 15(1) RPBA issued on 22 October 2020 the Board expressed its preliminary opinion that the subject-matter defined in claim 1 of the patent as granted appeared to comply with the requirements of novelty and inventive step.

Oral proceedings were held on 21 January 2022 by way of a videoconference.

VI. The arguments of the appellant relevant to the present decision can be summerized as follows:

Document D1 described dental composites comprising a strontium glass powder of a mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym. The composite defined in claim 1 as granted differed inter alia from the composites as exemplified in examples 6 and 7 of document D1 in the feature of the structural filler having less than 50% by volume of particles larger than 0.5 mym. As could be shown by calculation, this feature was not inherent in the definition of the mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym in document D1.

According to the patent the use of a structural filler with particles of smaller diameters improved luster and translucency of the composite required for cosmetic restorations, which was not obvious from the prior art. In line with the equivalent US disclosure (D1a) document D1 explicitly taught to avoid using a structural filler with a mean particle diameter smaller than 0.5 mym, because with such a filler esthetics tended to be inferior due to turbidity and opalescence.

The ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC represented a fresh ground for opposition in the appeal proceedings. This ground had not been raised in the notice for opposition and the opposition division had not decided to admit this ground. As the appellant did not consent to its introduction in the appeal proceedings, this fresh ground for opposition should not be considered by the Board. The raised fresh ground further concerned amendments in claim 17 as granted with respect to claim 19 as originally filed, which merely involved the deletion of the term "about" in relation with numerical definitions and the omission of a non-essential limitation regarding the shrinkage upon curing. These amendments did evidently not violate Article 123 (2) EPC.

VII. The arguments of the respondent relevant to the present decision can be summerized as follows:

Document D1 described in its examples 6 and 7 dental composites comprising a polymerizable resin base, a structural filler with a mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym, a prepolymerized filler and a nanofiller. These exemplified composites were covered by the definition of the composite in claim 1 as granted. Taking account of the requirement of a narrow particle size distribution in dental composites the feature of the structural filler having less than 50% by volume of particles larger than 0.5 mym in claim 1 as granted was inherent to the mean particle size of the structural filler of 0.5 mym as described in document D1.

No particular effect with respect to the composites of document D1 had been shown for the composite of claim 1 as granted. The patent further only associated an alleged effect on translucency and luster with the mean particle size and not with any particular size distribution. The problem solved could therefore only be seen the provision of an alternative.

In the context of dental composites as described in document D1 a filler with a narrow size distribution would represent an obvious choice for the skilled person and lead to a composite as defined in claim 1 as granted. Document D1 did not describe fillers with particles of a mean diameter below 0.5 mym as unsuitable for use in the composites. As clarified in the manual translation (D1b) document D1 merely mentioned a tendency towards poorer esthetics due to the occurrence of cloudiness and an opal-like appearance when the average particle size is less than 0.5 mym. This tendency was bound affect the composite of claim 1 as granted as well and did not teach away from using a structural filler as defined in claim 1 as granted. Document D2 further confirmed that structural fillers with a smaller mean diameter were indeed suitable for use in dental composites. Moreover, document D11 explicitly taught to use fillers with a narrow particle size distribution to minimize the fraction of particles with a size above 0.5 mym, which otherwise produced a non-glossy surface.

The definition of the method of claim 17 as granted differed from claim 19 as originally filed in the omission of the limitation to 2% or less volumetric shrinkage of the composite upon curing and the deletion of the term "about" in relation to defined quantities. As a result of these amendments claim 17 as granted included an embodiment characterized by tremendous volumetric shrinkage upon curing due to a total filler loading of only 11.01% by volume, which was contrary to the teaching of the application as originally filed directed to composites with limited shrinkage. Claim 17 therefore included subject-matter extending beyond the original disclosure. The raised ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC was prima facie highly relevant. The raised ground did further not concern a fresh ground for opposition at the appeal stage, because the respondent had already raised the ground during the oral proceedings before the opposition division, during which the appellant had actually filed new auxiliary requests in response.

VIII. The appellant requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be maintained as granted or, subsidiarily, that the patent be maintained on the basis of one of the auxiliary requests 1-12 filed with the statement of grounds of appeal.

The appellant objected against the introduction of the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC.

IX. The respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed.

The respondent further requested that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC be considered during the appeal proceedings.

Alternatively, the respondent requested remittal to the first instance for examination of compliance with the requirement of Article 123 (2) EPC.

Main request, the patent as granted

1. Novelty

1.1 Claim 1 of the patent as granted defines a dental composite comprising a polymerizable resin base and a filler comprising a ground structural filler, a prepolymerized filler, and a nanofiller. The claim requires that the ground structural filler consists of particles that have been ground to a mean particle size between 0.05 µm and 0.50 µm, wherein the ground structural filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter."

1.2 Document D1 describes in its examples 6 and 7 dental composites comprising a polymerizable resin base, a structural filler with a mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym, a prepolymerized filler and a nanofiller (see D1 page 10 paragraph 25 and page 12 Table 1; compare D1a column 9 lines 41-50 and columns 13-14 Table 1). The glass powder C used in examples 6 and 7 is described in document D1 as a strontium glass powder with a mean particle diameter of 0.5 mym and maximal size of 1.5 mym without further specification of the size distribution (see D1 page 10 paragraph [0023]; compare D1a column 9 lines 19-20).

1.3 The mean particle size of 0.5 mym of the structural filler described in document D1 does according to the Board not imply that this filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles with a diameter above 0.5 mym. On the contrary, in a filler with a mean particle size of 0.5 mym generally more than 50% of the volume will result from particles larger than the mean size of 0.5 mym due to the disproportionate contribution to the volume from the larger particles. As indicated by the appellant this disproportionate contribution from the larger particles can be demonstrated by calculation examples. In this context the Board further observes that document D1 does not refer to a particular narrow size distribution and that even in the case of a narrow size distribution the larger particles still retain, be it to a lesser extent, their disproportionate contribution to the volume.

The Board therefore agrees with the appellant that document D1 does not describe a structural filler consisting of particles with a mean particle size between 0.05 µm and 0.50 µm, wherein the structural filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter, as defined in claim 1 of the patent as granted.

1.4 Accordingly, the Board concludes that the subject-matter of claim 1 as granted is new over the prior art.

2. Inventive step

2.1 The identification of document D1 as closest prior art is not in dispute.

As explained in section 2.3 above, document D1 does not describe the structural filler consisting of particles with a mean particle size between 0.05 µm and 0.50 µm, wherein the structural filler contains less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter.

Paragraphs [0014], [0021] and [0047] of the patent describe that the use of particles having a mean size less than the wavelength of light, in particular less than about 0.5 µm, contributes to the luster and translucency required for cosmetic restorations. The use of a structural filler containing less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter is in this context explicitly mentioned as an exemplary embodiment (see paragraph [0014]). The patent further presents actual values for translucency and gloss for test samples in Table 3 (see page 8).

Starting from document D1 the problem to be solved may therefore be seen in the provision of a dental composite in which translucency and luster required for cosmetic restorations are safeguarded.

2.2 As solution to this problem the subject-matter as defined in claim 1 as granted would not seem obvious to the skilled person.

In this context it may be acknowledged that the prior art does not generally dissuade from using structural fillers with mean particles size below 0.5 µm in dental composites. Document D2 refers to a glass powder with a preferred average particle size between 0.1 and 2 µm as suitable for use in a material for dental restorations (see D2 page 6 lines 9-12). Furthermore, document D11 describes a grinding method for producing a dental filler with a mean particle size between 0.05 and 0.5 µm suitable for use in load-bearing dental restorations which have a transparency value above 45 and maintain a glossy appearance required for cosmetic restorations (see D11 paragraphs [0014] to [0015]).

However, document D1 describes that in its composites the use of a glass powder with a diameter smaller than 0.5 µm results in cloudiness and a strong opal-like appearance leading to a tendency of poor aesthetics (see D1 page 8 final section of paragraph [0019], compare document D1a column 7 lines 30-34, see also document D1c). Document D1 thereby explicitly directs the skilled person away from using a structural filler with smaller sized particles on the basis of esthetic considerations. Precisely such a structure filler with smaller sized particles is defined in claim 1 as granted, which requires a mean particle size between 0.05 µm and 0.50 µm with less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm. Starting from document D1 and faced with the problem to safeguard the translucency and luster required for cosmetic restorations the skilled person would therefore not be motivated by the information in documents D2 or D11 to modify the dental composites of document D1 by using the structural filler as defined in claim 1 as granted.

2.3 The respondent contented that the patent does not associate the feature of the size distribution of the particles with a mean particle with the translucency and luster and that the alleged optical properties of the claimed composition lack substantiation. The Board considers these contentions unfounded having regard to the explicit reference to a structure filler containing less than 50% by volume of particles above 0.5 µm in diameter as an exemplary embodiment in paragraph [0014] of the patent and the values for translucency and gloss for tested samples reported in Table 3 on page 8 of the patent.

The Board further rejects the respondent's interpretation that document D1 merely refers to a tendency towards inferior esthetics from the use of a structural filler with a mean particle size below 0.5 and does thereby not teach away from using such fillers. Faced with the problem of providing a dental composite in which the translucency and luster required for cosmetic restorations are safeguarded the skilled person would as a matter of course be deterred from using a type of filler which is explicitly described as tending towards poor esthetics due to the occurrence of cloudiness and a strong opal-like appearance.

2.4 Accordingly, the Board concludes that the subject-matter of claim 1 involves an inventive step.

3. Admittance of the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC

3.1 The ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC, had not been raised in the notice for opposition.

During the oral proceedings before the opposition division on 15 September 2017 the opponent raised this ground for opposition for the first time. According to the minutes of the oral proceedings (see section 2.4) the parties were explicitly reminded by the opposition division that, whilst the opponent was given the opportunity to present his arguments regarding the new ground for opposition, this new ground was not yet admitted into the proceedings. Neither the minutes of the oral proceedings nor the decision under appeal indicate that the opposition division at any later stage decided to admit the new ground for opposition.

3.2 The principles as set out in the opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of G 10/91 apply. The Enlarged Board clarified that grounds not properly covered by the notice for opposition should only be considered by the opposition division if prima facie for clear reasons such grounds appear to prejudice the maintenance of the patent (see G 10/91 section 16). The Enlarged Board further explained that the purpose of the appeal procedure inter partes is mainly to give the losing party a possibility to challenge the decision of the opposition division on its merits and that it is not in conformity with this purpose to consider grounds for opposition on which the decision under appeal has not been based. Fresh grounds for opposition may therefore in principle not be introduced at the appeal stage, but an exception to this principle is justified if the proprietor agrees with the consideration of the fresh ground for opposition and if the Board considers the fresh ground to be already prima facie highly relevant (see G 10/91 section 18).

3.3 The respondent argued that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC should be considered during the appeal proceedings or else by the opposition division following remittal notwithstanding the appellant's denied consent to its introduction into the proceedings, because this ground was not raised for the first time during the appeal proceedings and because this ground was prima facie highly relevant with respect to claim 17 as granted.

The Board observes that the respondent's requests regarding the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC confront the Board with the issue of admittance of a new ground for opposition which was raised during the oral proceedings before the opposition division but had deliberately not been decided upon by the opposition division. However, in the absence of a positive decision on admittance by the opposition division, the Board considers that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC should be treated as a fresh ground at the appeal stage and its admittance should be governed by the principles set forth in G 10/91, which require the proprietor's consent for its introduction in the appeal proceedings. In view of the appellant's refusal thereto, the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) is not to be introduced in the appeal proceedings.

In any case, for the reason presented in section 3.4 below the Board considers that the raised ground for opposition under Article 100 c) is not prima facie highly relevant and is in line with the principles as set out in G 10/91 not to be introduced in the appeal proceedings irrespective of any consent from the appellant.

3.4 The Board observes that the wording of claim 17 as granted essentially corresponds to the wording of claim 19 as originally filed except for the deletion of the term "about" in relation to certain numerically defined features, in particular the defined percentages by volume of the components of the composite, and the omission of the feature "wherein, upon curing, the dental composite paste is adapted to exhibit about 2% or less volumetric shrinkage, as measured by the water buoyancy method."

As argued by the appellant, the deletion of the term "about" in relation to numerical definitions seems a conventional type of amendment, which does not typically result in subject-matter extending beyond the application as filed. As further pointed out by the appellant, claim 1 defines a composition with the same components as the composition used according claim 17 as granted without any reference to a limited shrinkage of 2% or less. It seems therefore questionable whether the limitation of the volumetric shrinkage to 2% or less as defined in claim 19 as originally filed represents an essential feature in the context of the original disclosure when taken as a whole. The Board is therefore not convinced that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC as raised by the respondent is prima facie highly relevant with respect to granted claim 17 as contended by the respondent.

The Board therefore rejects the respondent's requests for consideration of the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC in the appeal proceedings or else remittal to the opposition division for examination of this ground.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is maintained as granted.

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