The IPKat
MARCH 26, 2025
The EPO Board of Appeal decision in T 0687/22 confirms beyond doubt the relevance of G 2/21 to software inventions. The decision in T 0687/22 links the case law from G 1/19 and G 2/21 to highlight t he importance of establishing a credible technical effect of software invention. Headnote II).
Intellectual Property Law Blog
AUGUST 30, 2021
1 are defined in an article published in 2020 by the USPTO. In the following sections, we will discuss an illustrative list of subject areas that may offer patentable AI inventions. (1) The figure below shows the volume of public AI patent applications categorized by AI component in the U.S. from 1990-2018. 1) Training phase.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The IPKat
SEPTEMBER 10, 2023
The minutes of oral proceedings have been published from the referring Board of Appeal case behind G 2/21 ( T 0116/18 ). The minutes are brief but confirm the Board of Appeal's decision to acknowledge the inventive step of the claimed invention and to dismiss the appeal. How many moths needed for an invention?
The IPKat
AUGUST 10, 2021
A Board of Appeal is about to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) on the ability of a patentee to rely on post-published evidence to support the inventive step of a claim, and particularly to support the plausibility that the technical problem has been solved over the full scope of the claim.
SpicyIP
NOVEMBER 9, 2024
In his recent work published in the Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice , Dr. Mo Abolkheir argues that the prevailing interpretation of ‘inventive steps’ places emphasis on the inventor’s imaginative capacity rather than the invention itself. It confuses ‘invention’ with ‘person.’
The IPKat
JANUARY 22, 2025
The Board of Appeal decision in T 0816/22 considered whether post-published phase III clinical trial data showing lack of efficacy can invalidate a second medical use patent that appeared plausible based on the data in the application as filed. However, importantly, clinical trials are not necessarily required to establish plausibility.
The IPKat
MARCH 24, 2023
The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) has released its written decision in G 2/21 on the question of post-published evidence. The Opponent argued that the synergistic effect of the compounds against the third moth species was not plausible from the application as filed, and so the post-published evidence should not be taken into account.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
64 
Let's personalize your content