| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1988:T029285.19880127 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 27 January 1988 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0292/85 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 78300596.0 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C12K 1/02 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | A | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | - | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Genentech | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | 1. An invention (here: biological) is sufficiently disclosed if at least one way is clearly indicated enabling the person skilled in the art to carry out the invention. Then the non-availability of some particular variants or unsuitability of some unspecified variants of a functionally defined component feature of the invention is immaterial to sufficiency as long as there are suitable variants known to the skilled person through the disclosure or common general knowledge which provide the same effect for the invention. The disclosure need not include specific instructions as to how all possible component variants within the functional definition should be obtained (cf. point 3.1.5 of the Reasons). 2. Generally applicable biological processes are not insufficiently described for the sole reason that some starting materials or genetic precursors therefor, e.g. a particular DNA or plasmid, are not readily available to obtain each and every variant of the expected result of the invention (here: product) provided the process as such is reproducible (cf. point 3.3.3 of the Reasons). 3. The non-obviousness of the plasmids also imparts an inventive step to the other claimed subject-matters relating to their preparation and to their use for making polypeptides and immunogenic substances. |
||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Sufficiency of disclosure Functional terms in claims Provision of all embodiments Inclusion of future inventions Non-availability or unsuitability of some components Non-availability of starting materials for general processes Inventive step Closest art pointing away from invention Trial doomed to failure Common general knowledge Publications qualifying in early history of a particular art Non-obviousness of plasmids Other claimed subject-matter involving plasmids |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: | |||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t850292ex1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
50 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Offical Journal of the EPO
XOJ EPO SE 1/2021, p179 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2020)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2020, p174 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2019)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2019, p158 - XVI. - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2018)