Exxon/Fuels Oil, t409/91, 1994
Citation: Exxon/Fuels Oil, t409/91, 1994
Rule of thumb: If a problem has been solved, does this help with a patent being granted? Yes, if a problem has been solved, this raises a presumption that a patent should be granted, with the method for how it is done less important in these circumstances.
Judgment:
The Court in this case held that before the Courts looks at how something has been done, then it is important to know what actual contribution that it makes to society and what problem it solves. There actually has to be a practical use for something with a patent application and this is the first part of the process, ‘When considering the validity of a simple product claim... it may be that concentrating on the identification of the inventive step rather than the technical contribution can lead to error. “Inventive step” suggests how something has been done, and, in the case of a product claim at any rate, one is primarily concerned with what has been allegedly invented, not how it has been done. On the other hand where the claim s for a process or includes a process, the issue of how the alleged invention has been achieved seems to be more in point’, Lord Neuberger
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.