FCJ rules that the skilled person will look for approaches already provided by a standard when wanting to improve that standard
The German Federal Court of Justice recently issued a decision entitled ‘E-Mail via SMS’, November 22, 2011, X ZR 58/10, in which it was found that when seeking to improve a data structure prescribed in an international standard, a skilled person would consider mechanisms already described in the standard when solving the identified technical problem. It was furthermore found that if the standard provides a manageable number of possible solutions, each having specific advantages and disadvantages, this provides an incentive to take each of the solutions into account.
In the case in question it was ruled that it was obvious to apply a known concept for sending instructions to a SIM card of a [...]
German Federal Court of Justice confirms application of Comvik/Hitachi approach
The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) recently further confirmed the basic tendency of bringing national case law into line with that of the European Patent Office. In the decision “Wiedergabe topographischer Informationen” (Reproduction of topographical information)BGH.Wiedergabe.topografischer.Informationen.X.ZR.47-07, the Federal Court of Justice had to deal with a method and device for the perspective display of a part of a topographic map, see European patent EP 0 378 271. The claims were found to lack an inventive step by the FCJ based on reasoning that conforms to the Comvik or Hitachi approach applied by the EPO. In other words, features relating to the perspective presentation o [...]
G1/09 pending application, European Patent Office (Appeals Court), 29 September 2010
- By Lars de Haas,
for Kluwer IP Cases
The Enlarged Board of Appeal answered the question referred to it by the Board of Appeal in J 2/08.
The Enlarged Board of Appeal held that after a decision to refuse a European patent application, the application remains pending, in the sense that a divisional application can be validly filed, until the expiry of the time limit for filing a notice of appeal, when no appeal is filed.
Click here for the full text of this case. A summary of this case will be posted on http://www.KluwerIPCases.com.
[...]Programs for computers G3/08, European Patent Office (EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal Opinion), 12 May 2010
- By Ferry van Looijengoed,
for Kluwer IP Cases
The G3/08 opinion concerns the long-awaited view of the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBoA) on the patentability of computer programs. The EBoA examined various issues regarding Article 112(1)(b) EPC. The EBoA held that positions taken in T1173/97 and T424/03 were clearly contradictory on the question whether it makes a difference whether a computer program is claimed by itself or as a record on a carrier. However, the EBoA concluded that this divergence does not allow a referral by the President of the European Patent Office as defined in Article 112(1)(b) EPC since it qualifies as a development of the case law.
On the question whether a claimed feature must cause a technical effect on a physic [...]
Imperceptibly different image/HOURPLACE, European Patent Office (EPO Board of Appeal), 30 September 2009
- By Ferry van Looijengoed,
for Kluwer IP Cases
The appellant in this case filed a statement of grounds against the decision of the examining division to refuse a patent application. For the main request this statement only stated that it was believed that the application met the requirements of the European Patent Convention and maintained the arguments presented in the examination procedure. For an auxiliary request, the appellant provided further arguments. The Board of Appeal decided that the appeal as a whole was admissible. However, the main request was not, since the appellant’s arguments were already dealt with in the decision of the examining division and the Board could not understand immediately from the statement of grounds wh [...]
Effecting Payment Card Transactions, European Patent Office (EPO Board of Appeal), 08 September 2009
- By Ferry van Looijengoed,
for Kluwer IP Cases
The Examining Division had refused a patent application for a method and system of processing a payment card transaction. Before the Board of Appeal, the applicant requested suspension of the proceedings to await the opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal in G 3/08. The Board of Appeal refused to grant the requested suspension, because the present case was not concerned with computer programs as such and thus not with the points of law the Enlarged Board is expected to address when answering the referred questions. Although it could not be excluded that the answer of Enlarged Board to one of the questions would cover subject-matter related to the present case, the interest of the party awai [...]
