Dépôt de Brevet Étude de cas

EPC case law concerning biotech• Clarity problems (Art. 84 EPC)• Sufficiency of disclosure problems (Art. 83 EPC)• Industrial Applicability problems (Art. 57 EPC)Béatrice ORESConseil en Propriété Industrielle1KPAA/CNCPI – Paris – November 6, 2009Clarity (Art. 84 EPC)The claims shall define the matter for which protection is sought.They shall be clear and concise and be supported by the description (A. 84 EPC).2KPAA/CNCPI – Paris – November 6, 2009Clarity problems• The wording of a claim must be such that the skilled person has no question as regards the scope of the claim (T923/92).• A claim must contain all the essential techni- cal features of the claimed subject-matter (T269/87).3KPAA/CNCPI – Paris – November 6, 2009Clarity problems• Functional features may be admitted in a claim, if they cannot otherwise be defined more precisely without restricting the scope of the invention and if in relation to these features the description provides instructions which are sufficiently clear for the expert to put the invention into practice with no more then a reasonable amount of experimentation (T391/91)4KPAA/CNCPI – Paris – November 6, 2009Clarity problems• In cases where the core of the claimed invention consists in the achievement of a given technical effect by known techniques in different areas of application and serious doubts exist as to whether this effect can readily be obtained for the whole range of applications ...