In several decisions, the boards have taken the view that the criteria set out by the Enlarged Board in G 2/88 and G 6/88 (OJ 1990, 93 und OJ 1990, 114) cannot readily be applied to process claims. Particularly in the more recent case law, they have found that those criteria can be applied only to claims directed to the use of a substance for achieving an effect and cannot be extended to claims directed to a process for producing a product characterised by process steps wherein the purpose of carrying out said process steps is indicated in the claim (T 1049/99, T 1343/04, T 1179/07, T 304/08, T 2215/08, T 1039/09, T 1140/09). The case law has constantly interpreted G 2/88 in a restrictive manner, i.e. to mean that only claims relating to the use of a known compound for a particular purpose, based on a technical effect described in the patent, should be interpreted as including that technical effect as a functional technical feature, provided that such technical feature has not previously been made available to the public (T 1822/12).