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 0942/18 01-07-2020
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 0942/18 01-07-2020

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2020:T094218.20200701
Date of decision
01 July 2020
Case number
T 0942/18
Petition for review of
-
Application number
11158576.6
IPC class
B26B19/38
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 406.54 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

Electric shaver

Applicant name

Panasonic Intellectual Property

Management Co., Ltd.

Opponent name
THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY
Board
3.2.07
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention 083 (2007)
European Patent Convention 100(b) (2007)
European Patent Convention 111(2) (2007) sentence 1
European Patent Convention 111(2) (2007)
European Patent Convention 113(1) (2007)
European Patent Convention 103(1)(a) (2007)
European Patent Convention 116(1) (2007)
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 011 (2020)
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 012(8) (2020)
Keywords

Remittal to the department of first instance - fundamental deficiency in first instance proceedings (yes)

Substantial procedural violation - appealed decision reasoned (no)

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
T 0063/06
Citing decisions
T 0461/18
T 1076/21

I. The patent proprietor lodged his appeal in the prescribed form and within the prescribed time limits against the decision of the opposition division revoking the European patent EP 2 371 495.

The grounds of opposition invoked were those according to Article 100(a) EPC (lack of novelty, lack of inventive step), as well as those according to Article 100(b) and (c) EPC.

II. The patent was revoked based on the ground according to Article 100(b) EPC because of a lack of sufficiency of disclosure.

III. The independent claims 1 of the main request at the basis of the impugned decision (as granted) reads as follows:

"An electric shaver (1), comprising:

an outer blade (8) including blade holes (50) defined by bars (40); an inner blade (13) which is provided inside of the outer blade (8) and moved relative to the outer blade (8) to cut a body hair inserted into one of the blade holes (50), wherein the bars (40) include a hair raising bar (45) having a hair raising portion (45g) raising the body hair, the hair raising bar (45) includes a skin contact surface (45a) facing skin (70), a flat-bottom surface (45b) formed on the inner blade (13) side, an inner side surface (45c) facing the blade holes (50) or the inner blade (13), and a hair raising surface (45d) connecting the skin contact surface (45a) and the inner side surface (45c), characterized by a profile shape of a cross section of the hair raising portion (45g) is formed by connecting a blade hole side edge (45e) in a cross-sectional line of the skin contact surface (45a) and a blade hole side edge (45f) in a cross-sectional line of the inner side surface (45c) with one linear connecting element (81a), and the linear connecting element (81a) and the cross-sectional line (45h) of the skin contact surface (45a) are connected so that the angle between the linear connecting element (81a) and the cross-sectional line (45h) of the skin contact surface (45a) is not less than 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees, and the linear connecting element (81a) and the cross-sectional line (45i) of the inner side surface (45c) are connected so that the angle between the linear connecting element (81a) and the cross-sectional line (45i) of the inner side surface (45c) is not less than 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees, wherein the inner side surface (45c) is inclined."

The independent claims 2 of the main request at the basis of the impugned decision (as granted) reads as follows:

"An electric shaver (1), comprising:

an outer blade (8) including blade holes (50) defined by bars (40); an inner blade (13) which is provided inside of the outer blade (8) and moved relative to the outer blade (8) to cut a body hair inserted into one of the blade holes (50), wherein the bars (40) include a hair raising bar (45) having a hair raising portion (45g) raising the body hair, the hair raising bar (45) includes a skin contact surface (45a) facing skin (70), a flat-bottom surface (45b) formed on the inner blade (13) side, an inner side surface (45c) facing the blade holes (50) or the inner blade (13), and a hair raising surface (45d) connecting the skin contact surface (45a) and the inner side surface (45c), a profile shape of a cross section of the hair raising portion (45g) is formed by connecting a blade hole side edge (45e) in a cross-sectional line of the skin contact surface (45a) and a blade hole side edge (45f) in a cross-sectional line of the inner side surface (45c) with a plurality of connecting elements (80), characterized by the plurality of connecting elements (80) are one line segment (81) and one arc line (82), wherein the inner side surface (45c) is inclined."

The independent claims 3 of the main request at the basis of the impugned decision (as granted) reads as follows:

"An electric shaver (1), comprising:

an outer blade (8) including blade holes (50) defined by bars (40); an inner blade (13) which is provided inside of the outer blade (8) and moved relative to the outer blade (8) to cut a body hair inserted into one of the blade holes (50), wherein the bars (40) include a hair raising bar (45) having a hair raising portion (45g) raising the body hair, the hair raising bar (45) includes a skin contact surface (45a) facing skin (70), a flat-bottom surface (45b) formed on the inner blade (13) side, an inner side surface (45c) facing the blade holes (50) or the inner blade (13), and a hair raising surface (45d) connecting the skin contact surface (45a) and the inner side surface (45c), a profile shape of a cross section of the hair raising portion (45g) is formed by connecting a blade hole side edge (45e) in a cross-sectional line of the skin contact surface (45a) and a blade hole side edge (45f) in a cross-sectional line of the inner side surface (45c) with a plurality of connecting elements (80), characterized by the plurality of connecting elements (80) include a plurality of line segments (81) and/or a plurality of arc lines (82), wherein angles formed by connecting pairs of any two of the line segments (81), the cross sectional line (45h) of the skin contact surface (45a), and the cross-sectional line (45i) of the inner side surface (45c) are all not less than 90 degrees but less than 180 degrees, and any two of the arc lines (82) connected to each other have the centers of curvature positioned different from each other, wherein a top portion (T1) is formed in the skin side of the hair raising surface (45d), and the inner side surface (45c) is inclined."

IV. The appellant (patent proprietor), while requesting that the appeal fee be reimbursed, initially defended the patent as granted and, in the alternative, in amended form on the basis of one of auxiliary requests submitted with the statement setting out the grounds of appeal.

The respondent (opponent) initially requested the dismissal of the appeal.

V. In order to prepare for the oral proceedings scheduled at the request of both parties, the Board issued a communication pursuant to Article 15(1) RPBA dated 20 April 2020.

The Board's preliminary assessment of the case was, following a corresponding objection raised in the statement setting out the grounds for appeal, that the issue of sufficiency of disclosure, on the basis of which the patent in suit was revoked, did not appear to be sufficiently reasoned in the impugned decision.

As a consequence of the above the reimbursement of the appeal fee and a remittal to the opposition division for further prosecution were to be expected as likely outcome of the appeal procedure.

VI. In a letter dated 28 May 2020 the appellant reacted to the Board's communication by modifying their requests, namely

(1) to set aside the decision under appeal and to remit the case to the opposition division;

(2) in case the request under (1) is not granted in writing, to set aside the decision under appeal and reject the opposition;

(3) in case the request under (2) cannot be granted in writing, to schedule oral proceedings;

(4) in case the request under (2) cannot be granted, and further auxiliary, to maintain the patent on the basis of one of auxiliary requests 1 to 4 subject to the decision under appeal, and auxiliary requests 5-7 and 1'-7' attached to the statement setting out the grounds of appeal; and

(5) to reimburse the appeal fee.

VII. In a letter dated 10 June 2020 the respondent confirmed its original main request, namely

that the appeal be dismissed.

Should a decision remitting the case to the opposition division for further prosecution be issued, the respondent additionally requested (supplementary request)

that the order thereof contained the following statements:

- that the Board had formed no view about the substantive issue of whether any of the appellant's requests met the requirements of Article 83 EPC;

- that the opposition division be prevented from reopening the debate and from appointing further oral proceedings on this particular issue.

The respondent withdrew their previous request for oral proceedings and instead requested oral proceedings before any decision is taken by the Board that any of the requests of the appellant meets the requirements of Article 83 EPC.

The respondent noted that they understood that the Board would be able to allow the request (1) of the appellant in their letter of 28 May, without hearing the parties at oral proceedings. However, the Board would have to hold oral proceedings before allowing request (2) of the appellant.

VIII. Insofar as relevant to the present proceedings, the appellant argued as follows.

The appealed decision did not contain any explanation on why the claimed cross-sectional geometry of the hair raising bar had microscopical dimensions in the range of some µm.

This unsubstantiated allegation was taken as basis for a further unsubstantiated allegation, namely that the known manufacturing techniques were unsuitable for achieving the claimed geometry, and that therefore the invention was not sufficiently disclosed.

The appealed decision was therefore not reasoned within the meaning of Rule 111(2) EPC.

Moreover, the opposition division also disregarded the appellant's central argument that conventional manufacturing techniques also included laser cutting, sintering and deburring, and that these allowed manufacturing of the claimed outer blades at the time of priority without any undue burden.

IX. In relation to the above issue, raised by the appellant, that the appealed decision was not reasoned, the respondent argued as follows.

The appealed decision was not only correct in substance but also reasoned.

A more extensive reasoning was not necessary, because, following T 63/06 (not published in the OJ EPO) the burden of proof on sufficiency of disclosure was on the proprietor-appellant, who failed to offer any evidence of the existence of a suitable process that was both common general knowledge and capable of making the claimed outer blades.

As there was no reasonable doubt that the claimed geometrical features of the outer blades had very small dimensions, in spite of the fact that no dimensions were mentioned in the claims, the opposition division did not need to address this issue in detail in its decision.

The absence, in the appealed decision, of a statement that the appellant failed to discard his burden of proof by explaining how the manufacturing techniques they mentioned could be used to put the invention into practice, was not to be considered as a fundamental deficiency.

Remittal only because of such a minor defect, limited to the formulation of the reasons appealed decision, would be seriously detrimental to procedural economy.

Even if the impugned decision contained this defect, still it was taken on a sound procedural basis, because the opposition division heard the parties, closed the debate and deliberated before the decision was announced, and correct in substance.

In the eventuality that the case was to be remitted for further prosecution, the opposition division should be only permitted to complete the reasons by adding the missing statements, and be prevented from re-opening the discussion on sufficiency of disclosure, because this would give an unfair procedural advantage to the appellant, who would be heard at three instances.

1. The case is ready for decision which is taken in written proceedings without holding oral proceedings in accordance with Article 12(8) RPBA 2020. The parties' rights under Articles 113 and 116 EPC are observed.

The principle of the right to be heard pursuant to Article 113(1) EPC is observed since that provision only affords the opportunity to be heard and the parties' submissions are fully taken into account.

1.1 The appellant's request for oral proceedings pursuant to Article 116(1) EPC is auxiliary to their main request (1) that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the case be remitted to the opposition division.

1.2 The respondent's request for oral proceedings is auxiliary to their main request that the appeal be dismissed and to their auxiliary request that the Board when remitting the case to the opposition division does not take any decision on the compliance with the requirements of Article 83 EPC of any of the sets of claims relied upon or filed by the appellant.

1.3 Thus, since the case is remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution in accordance with the appellant's main request (see point 1.1 above) and because this decision does not deal with the issue of compliance with the requirements of Article 83 EPC on the merits, as requested by the respondent (see point 1.2 above), both parties' auxiliary requests for oral proceedings remain inactive.

2. The impugned decision

2.1 The relevant passages of the decision under appeal related to the issue of sufficiency of the claims of the patent as granted, corresponding to the then main request, read as follows:

"The subject-matter of the patent in suit is directed to an outer blade for an electric shaver having hair raising bars with a very specific cross-sectional geometry, in particular the shape of the connection between the skin contact surface (45a) and the inner side surface (45c).

The description provides detailed description of embodiments for any combination disclosed in the claims, i.e. the skin contact surface (45a) being connected to the inner inclined surface (45c) by a single line or a plurality of line segments or by a line and an arc or by a plurality of lines and arcs or by a plurality of arcs wherein the line segments have certain angles with the respective connecting surfaces (45a and 45c) and/or the arcs have different centers and/or curvatures. The patent in suit as a whole is however silent about how any of the claimed cross-sectional geometries of the hair raising bar could be achieved either experimentally or by mass production.

Bearing in mind the special cross-sectional geometry of the hair raising bar and the actual size thereof (mym) none of the common metal processing procedure at the date of the priority, like stamping, grinding, punching, die casting, coining or etching appears suitable for achieving the geometry with the specific parameters as set forth in the claims.

The Opposition Division is therefore of the opinion that the patent in suit is not disclosed sufficiently clear and complete for a skilled person to carry out at least one of the embodiments covered by the claims."

The negative decision on the then auxiliary requests was based on the above assessment related to the then main request and was formulated as follows:

"The auxiliary requests 1 to 4 filed with letter of 03.02.2017 do not address the issue relating to Article 83 EPC and thus none of these auxiliary requests overcomes the insufficiency of disclosure of the patent as a whole.

The auxiliary requests 5 to 7 were submitted during the oral proceedings, in response to the decision of the Opposition Division with respect to Article 83 EPC.

The ground of opposition relating to the insufficiency of disclosure (Art. 83 EPC) was present on file as from the Notice of Opposition and thus requests 5 to 7 filed during the oral hearing and addressing Article 83 EPC are considered as late filed and thus not allowed into the proceedings (Art. 114(2) EPC).

Furthermore, it is to be noted that the insufficiency of disclosure issue concerns the patent/application as a whole and not the disclosure of the claims alone. Thus, amending the set of claims cannot be considered as an appropriate measure for overcoming an issue relating to the insufficiency of disclosure."

2.2 The conclusion of the opposition division, that the claimed invention was not sufficiently disclosed, was based on the hypothesis that no known manufacturing technique was suitable for achieving the features specified in the claims (see point II above).

Said unsuitability was justified by a further hypothesis, namely that the claimed features had very small dimensions (in the range of some µm, see again point II above).

3. Lack of reasoning - Rule 111(2) EPC

3.1 The Board fully concurs with the view of the appellant that the impugned decision was not reasoned within the meaning of Rule 111(2) EPC.

This is because no explanation was given in relation to the following crucial points:

(i) why the cross-sectional geometry of the claimed hair raising bars necessarily had very small dimensions (in the range of some µm), in spite of the fact that no dimensions were given in the claims,

(ii) why the manufacturing techniques identified in the appealed decision as "conventional" were unsuitable for achieving the allegedly microscopical features specified in the claims.

3.2 According to the established jurisprudence (see the Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 9th edition 2019, III.K.3.4.3 and III.K.3.4.4) a decision should consider the essential facts, evidence and arguments in detail and contain the logical chain of reasoning which led to the conclusion drawn.

Even if "reasoning" does not mean that any argument submitted by any party should be dealt with in detail, as a rule, the reasons for a decision are inadequate if a reader had to reconstruct or even speculate as to why a negative decision was taken.

This is presently the case, because the "logical chain of reasoning" of the appealed decision is based on two hypothetical considerations which had to be motivated by the opposition division, because are not self-evident, and were not.

3.2.1 The respondent argues in its letter dated 10 June 2020 that the statement that the claimed features had very small dimensions (in the range of some µm) was self-evident to a skilled person, in spite of the fact that no dimensions were given therein, and did not therefore need any further explanation in the appealed decision.

This was because larger geometrical features would necessarily have resulted in a thicker outer blade, which would then have prevented the shaver from fulfilling its function of cutting the hair close to the skin.

The opposition division also did not need to give detailed reasons explaining why the geometrical features have very small dimensions, because it was not contested by the appellant that these were the typical dimensions in this technical field.

3.2.2 The Board disagrees, because the rejected claims are not formulated in a manner as to be restricted to such microscopical embodiments, and also because there is no evidence on file supporting the allegation that increasing the dimensions of the claimed geometrical features would have prevented the claimed electric shaver from providing an acceptable shaving performance (see the statement setting out the grounds of appeal, point 2.2.3 d).

3.3 Furthermore, the opposition division's conclusion that no manufacturing technique at all was available at the priority date for achieving the features specified in the claims being a "negative" claim, can also not be taken for self-evident, because the indication of concrete examples of unsuitable techniques cannot demonstrate that no suitable techniques exist at all.

3.4 As the appealed decision does not contain any motivation on the above identified crucial points, and these points were disputed between the parties (see the minutes of oral proceedings) the reasons thereof are not in line with the general principle of good faith and fair proceedings, and therefore deficient.

3.5 The respondent puts forward that the impugned decision was reasoned because it contained the following statement:

"The patent in suit as a whole is however silent about how any of the claimed cross-sectional geometries could be achieved either experimentally or by mass production." (see point 2.1 above).

In such a situation, it was upon the patentee-appellant to show that the common general knowledge of the skilled person was sufficient to put the invention into practice.

According to the ratio decidendi of T 63/06 (supra), so the respondent, the burden of proof on sufficiency was on the appellant, who failed to offer any evidence of the existence of a suitable process that was both common general knowledge and capable of making the claimed outer blade.

3.6 This position of the respondent cannot be shared by the Board for the following reasons.

The ratio decidendi of T 63/06 (supra, Reasons point 3.3) provides guidance for examining whether an opponent arguing lack of sufficiency has discharged its burden of proof.

According to this decision there could be circumstances in which a weak presumption exists that the invention is sufficiently disclosed. In such a case, the opponent can discharge his burden by plausibly arguing that common general knowledge would not enable the skilled person to put this feature into practice. It is then up to the patent proprietor to prove the contrary, i.e. that the skilled person's common general knowledge would enable him to carry out the invention.

T 63/06 does not therefore lift or relax in any way the requirement, set out in Rule 111(2) EPC, that decisions of the departments of the EPO should be reasoned.

As already discussed, the opposition division failed to provide any discussion to support the two hypotheses on which the impugned decision was based (see point 1 above).

The statement, identified by the respondent, according to which the impugned patent alone does not explain how the claimed cross-sectional geometries could be achieved, does not explain why these features have dimensions in the range of some µm or why no known manufacturing technique was suitable for achieving them.

4. The reasoning of the appealed decision is additionally considered deficient because the appellant's argument that there were further manufacturing techniques (e.g. laser cutting, sintering and deburring) with wich manufacturing of the claimed geometrical shapes would have been possible, was discussed during oral proceedings, as reflected in the minutes thereof (see page 2, second paragraph), but was not dealt with in the reasons.

5. Procedural violation - Main request of the respondent

Having reviewed the impugned decision the Board finds that the appellant has convincingly demonstrated that the appealed decision on the issue of sufficiency of disclosure is not reasoned in accordance with Rule 111(2) EPC.

This amounts to a substantial procedural violation because a fundamental procedural right of the appellant has been violated.

Because of this substantial procedural violation the appealed decision has to be set aside, and the main request of the respondent, namely that the appeal be dismissed, cannot be allowed.

6. Reimbursement of the appeal fee

As a further consequence of the above assessed substantial procedural violation, the Board also decides that the reimbursement of the appeal fee, as requested by the appellant, is equitable, according to Rule 103(1)(a) EPC.

7. Remittal

Rule 111(2) EPC gives parties to EPO proceedings a fundamental procedural right to be provided with the reasons for a decision.

Lack of compliance therewith is considered by the Board as a fundamental deficiency occurred during opposition proceedings within the meaning of Article 11, second sentence, RPBA 2020.

Such a fundamental deficiency is considered by the Board as "special reason" within the meaning of Article 11 RPBA 2020, which justifies a remittal to the opposition division for further prosecution, in accordance with Article 111(1) EPC.

The Board whishes to clarify that such a fundamental deficiency is not a minor defect, limited to the formulation of the reasons appealed decision, which was taken on a sound procedural basis and correct in substance, as argued by the respondent.

Furthermore, the fundamental deficiency in the decision under appeal as discussed in points 3 and 4 above also prevented the Board from any meaningful review of the opposition division's findings on the merits of the case as to whether or not the requirements of Article 83 EPC are met by any of the appellant's requests.

8. Further requests of the respondent

8.1 By way of supplementary requests (see page 4 of the respondent's letter dated 10 June 2020 and point VI above), the respondent requested specific terms of the order of the present decision.

8.2 These requests cannot be allowed for the following reasons:

8.2.1 In accordance with Article 111(2), first sentence, EPC the opposition division to which the case is remitted shall be bound by the ratio decidendi of the present decision in so far as the facts are the same.

8.2.2 For the reasons given in point 6 above, it is for procedural reasons that the case is to be remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution in accordance with Article 11 RPBA 2020. The present decision only establishes that a fundamental procedural right of the appellant has been violated because the decision settling the first instance proceedings was not reasoned. Since the case is to be remitted to the department of first instance without consideration of the substantive issues, the ratio decidendi of the present decision neither concerns the substantive aspects of sufficiency of disclosure, nor any issue of patentability. Therefore, the present decision does not have any binding effect so far as substantive issues are concerned.

8.2.3 Hence, the opposition division cannot be ordered to limit the prosecution on substantive issues or to follow specific procedural steps.

8.2.4 Further, since the decision of the opposition division is to be set aside, the opposition division will not be bound by it.

8.2.5 The Board also does not see how, by remitting the case to the opposition division, which will then have to take a reasoned decision on the requests of both parties, the appellant may be given an unfair procedural advantage over the respondent.

8.3 The respondent's supplementary requests are therefore refused.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The case is remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution.

3. The reimbursement of the appeal fee is ordered.

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