In previous issues we have discussed the influence of G2/07 and G1/08, also known as the ‘broccoli’ and ‘tomato’ cases, on the patentability of plants which have been, or could have been, obtained by methods excluded from patentability.
These cases both related to the production of plants in which a trait was introduced into the plants by crossing and selection steps.
The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) decided that since crossing and selection necessarily involve human intervention, the conclusion to be drawn is that a process for the production of plants which is based on the sexual crossing of whole genomes and on the subsequent selection of plants, in which human intervention, including the provision of a technical means, serves to enable or assist the performance of the process steps, is excluded from patentability as being “essentially biological” within the meaning of Article 53(b) of the European Patent Convention (EPC).
On this basis, if a patent claim is related to a process for obtaining plants based on sexual crossing and selection, these claims are not patentable irrespective of what other steps may be included in the claims.
To continue reading, you need a subscription to WIPR. Start a subscription to WIPR for £455.
In-house feature articles, the archive and expert comment require a paid subscription. Subscribe now.
Want to give it a try? We are offering a two week free trial to the WIPR website – register and select “Free Trial” to begin access to the full WIPR archive and read the latest news, features and expert comment. Begin your free trial here.
Is your 2 week free trial about to end? Upgrade to a 12 month subscription for £455 now.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email James Lynn on email@example.com.
plant patentability, EPC, broccoli and tomato cases, EBA