servickuz / shutterstock.com
Plausibility in the context of the inventive step and sufficiency requirements can be a contentious issue before the European Patent Office. Markus Grammel of Grünecker reports.
The European Patent Office (EPO), as the central organ of the European patent system, rewards inventors or their legal successors for their technical contribution to art with patent monopolies, fostering and stimulating innovation.
It is therefore a central pillar of the EPO’s practice to weed out purely speculative patents that do not make a technical contribution at the filing date.
To assess whether an invention is purely speculative, the Boards of Appeal of the EPO have developed the doctrine of “plausibility” in the context of sufficiency of disclosure/enablement as well as inventive step/non-obviousness. Plausibility is also sometimes applied when considering industrial applicability.
Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (LSIPR) tracks the increasing challenges for intellectual property specialists in the rapidly evolving world of life sciences. From gene patents to stem cell research, we provide the very best news and analysis.
To continue reading this article and to access 4,500+ articles, our digital magazines and special reports published for LSIPR subscribers only then you will need a subscription.
If you are already subscribed please login.
Official LSIPR subscribers include:
Allen & Overy
Arnold & Siedsma
Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch LLP (BSKB)
Carpmaels & Ransford
European Patent Office
George Washington Law School
Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
Marks & Clerk
NiKang Therapeutics Inc.
Powell Gilbert LLP
Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
World Intellectual Property Office
EPO, Grünecker, inventive step, Boards of Appeal, pharmaceutical, biotech, patent filings, medical use claims, prior art, plausibility, claimed compounds