tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post4478800086035759552..comments2023-10-24T14:45:41.342+02:00Comments on K’s Law: T 500/11 – You May Pick Itorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07992102028406713066noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-71793021713354125052013-10-26T09:04:03.687+02:002013-10-26T09:04:03.687+02:00Exactly the last sentence of anonymous 10.42 is th...Exactly the last sentence of anonymous 10.42 is the case with examples. Many variables have fixed values in an example and it is not allowed to pick one value and restrict it without having a look at the other values. Another point is that it is possible to get a patent for "selection inventions" are allowed and great care has to be taken that an application is not changed in a way as to result in such a selection invention, when it has not been disclosed to begin with.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-58018413947987815202013-10-26T09:03:37.880+02:002013-10-26T09:03:37.880+02:00Exactly the last sentence of anonymous 10.42 is th...Exactly the last sentence of anonymous 10.42 is the case with examples. Many variables have fixed values in an example and it is not allowed to pick one value and restrict it without having a look at the other values. Another point is that it is possible to get a patent for "selection inventions" are allowed and great care has to be taken that an application is not changed in a way as to result in such a selection invention, when it has not been disclosed to begin with. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-80731084747178869722013-10-25T10:42:42.340+02:002013-10-25T10:42:42.340+02:00If the original specification discloses a range an...If the original specification discloses a range and gives examples at particular points within thís range, what subject matter is added by selecting one of the particular examples as a boundary point? The disclosure of the original range teaches that the invention may be implemented at all values within this range and the specific example teaches that this particular value is also enabled. Restricting the claimed range would in my view generally not add subject matter unless there are a number of variables present and this combination is not disclosed in connection with the claimed new range.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-63577339814969902912013-10-25T09:22:49.358+02:002013-10-25T09:22:49.358+02:00Tom , indeed, why were no smaller ranges indicated...Tom , indeed, why were no smaller ranges indicated? That is elementary drafting which I see neglected more and more often. Are the good patent agents disappearing, or aren't they employed anymore or until after the harm has been done?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-72824200355489742332013-10-25T09:19:06.669+02:002013-10-25T09:19:06.669+02:00Karl, are you saying that when an application is d...Karl, are you saying that when an application is drafted and later a damaging document turns up, that should be disregarded because the applicant did not know it at the time of drafting? Then what do you mean by "good invention"? Surely not one that is not novel? Sorry, I fail to see the logic of what you say. The absolute requirement of novelty means that even if you did not know about a document, nevertheless it may be used against you. Which is also true for documents used against inventive step. One cannot get a patent for a "good invention" (whatever that nay mean) when it is not novel and inventive. Then it simply is not an invention, good or not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-40677421916479635262013-10-24T23:34:08.236+02:002013-10-24T23:34:08.236+02:00@ Karl: have a look at claim 1 and 2 as filed. The...@ Karl: have a look at claim 1 and 2 as filed. They specified extremely broad ranges as characterizing feature. I would say it is not really surprising if something is found within your two orders of magnitude. I don't understand why they did not mention any narrower range in the description (rather, less broad range).Tomnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-77630198762329635032013-10-24T11:32:50.475+02:002013-10-24T11:32:50.475+02:00I think the EPO needs to use a foreseeability test...I think the EPO needs to use a foreseeability test like they use in the US for doctrine of equivalents. If the applicant could not foresee a particular amendment might be needed there should be a more lenient burden to show basis in the application. No matter how well a specification is written a previously unknown document can be found in the search which needs an amendment one could not have predicted, and if that happens I think the unfairness of the situation needs to be appreciated. The patent system is about rewarding good inventions, not being able to predict the future.Karlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-71255876339870319942013-10-23T22:26:28.144+02:002013-10-23T22:26:28.144+02:00The decision might seem a bit unsettling, but in v...The decision might seem a bit unsettling, but in view of the case it appears fully justified. The fact that there are ranges does not change the situation.<br /> <br />This is one of the very few examples where an intermediate generalisation is justified.<br /> <br />The contrary happens much more often ...<br /> <br />For once that a Board decides that there is no intermediate generalisation, it should be greeted with good feelings.Raoulnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-67631607664780090972013-10-23T18:25:34.954+02:002013-10-23T18:25:34.954+02:00They indeed add a lot of matter to the content of ...They indeed add a lot of matter to the content of Art 123(2) as originally signed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2352189175211648260.post-22019868609513024502013-10-23T16:30:00.349+02:002013-10-23T16:30:00.349+02:00The EPO is way-too strict on added matter, and so ...The EPO is way-too strict on added matter, and so any decision which gives a little more leniency is to be welcomed. I've not seen any other Patent Office agonise so much over concepts like 'inextricably linked'.Suleman Alihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171832789491858471noreply@blogger.com