An invention is in principle sufficiently disclosed if at least one way is clearly indicated enabling the person skilled in the art to carry out the invention. If this is the case, the non-availability of some particular 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 (T 292/85, OJ 1989, 275). This has been confirmed by many decisions, for example: T 81/87 (OJ 1990, 250), T 301/87 (OJ 1990, 335), T 212/88 (OJ 1992, 28), T 238/88 (OJ 1992, 709), T 60/89 (OJ 1992, 268), T 182/89 (OJ 1991, 391), T 19/90 (OJ 1990, 476), T 740/90, T 456/91 and T 242/92.
If a claim comprises non-working embodiments, the consequences differ depending on the circumstances (G 1/03, OJ 2004, 413, citing T 238/88, OJ 1992, 709; T 292/85, OJ 1989, 275, and T 301/87, OJ 1990, 335).
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/html/caselaw/2019/e/clr_ii_c_5_2.htm
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021