EPO Enlarged Board addresses plausibility

Jakob Pade Frederiksen, Inspicos P/S

 

 

In its most recent decision, G 2/21 of 23 March 2023, the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO has considered fundamental questions in relation to the assessment of non-obviousness, notably on the principle of free evaluation of evidence and the notion of plausibility.

For the assessment of non-obviousness, the EPO generally applies the so-called “problem-solution approach”, in the context of which the technical effect brought about by the decisive novel feature(s) of the claim in question is to be defined. Oftentimes, when arguing in support of inventive step, applicants for or proprietors of European patents attempt to rely on a technical effect which is not disclosed in the application as filed, but which may possibly be apparent on the basis of post-published evidence, i.e., evidence published after the filing date.

According to the Enlarged Board of Appeal, such evidence may not be disregarded for the sole reason that it was not available to the public before the filing date. However, the Enlarged Board has expressed in its decision that it is decisive what the skilled person would understand at the filing date from the application as filed as being the technical teaching of the claimed invention. Further, the technical effect relied upon in relation to non-obviousness must be encompassed by that technical teaching.

Thus, according to the Enlarged Board of Appeal, evidence filed to prove a technical effect of the claimed subject-matter may not be disregarded solely on the ground that such evidence had not been public before the filing date and was filed after that date. Further, a patent applicant or proprietor may rely upon a technical effect for inventive step if the skilled person, having the common general knowledge in mind, and based on the application as originally filed, would derive said effect as being encompassed by the technical teaching and embodied by the same originally disclosed invention.

G 2/21 underlines the necessity for applicants to include a discussion of the technical effects of the invention, as well as possibly data supporting such effects, in their applications from the outset.

 

 

Andre nyheder

Fuldt hus og skarpe spørgsmål hos Dansk Industri 💡
Sidste fredag havde vores CEO Jakob Pade Frederiksen fornøjelsen af at tale ved Dansk Industris UPC Case Law Update-seminar. Sammen med Sture Rygaard (partner i advokatfirmaet Plesner) og Peter Juul Agergaard (Presiding Judge v...
Inspicos' hovedkontor i København flytter i marts 2026! ⭐
Vores nye domicil bliver på Strandvejen 60 i det livlige Tuborg Nord-område – et arkitektonisk designet, eksklusivt kvarter, der er en del af den ombyggede havnefront i Hellerup.   Her er, hvad vi ser frem til i de nye lokaler:...
Webinar 2. oktober 2025, 9:00 – 10:00 (CEST)
The EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal has had a busy summer. On 2 July 2025, the EBA decided on ‘black-box disclosures’ in decision G 1/23, overturning its own previous case law. In G 1/24 of 18 June 2025, a fundamental principle of...

VÆLG SEKTOR:

Sektor