Saturday, 26 December 2009

T 714/07 – Examples Are Presumed To Be Embodiments

The examples of [document] D1 as such do not indicate that the polyisobutene dispersants have functionalities of “greater than 1.3” as required in present claim 1. The examples are, however, considered to be preferred embodiments of the disclosure of a patent application. Therefore, the person skilled in the art will expect that they meet the requirements of the preferred embodiments set out in the description.

Paragraph [0091] of document D1 mentions that the minimum number of succinic groups for each equivalent weight of polyalkenyl substituent group is 1.3 while all the preferred ranges require it to exceed 1.3.

The person skilled in the art thus will conclude that example A-24 discloses that the dispersant of example A-26 has a functionality of 1.56 or less while exceeding 1.3, so that example A-26 anticipates the subject-matter of claim 1. [3.6]

Therefore, document D1 discloses all the features of present claim 1 in combination and deprives the subject-matter of this claim of novelty. [3.7] 

To read the whole decision, click here.