{"id":15349,"date":"2020-05-27T15:22:47","date_gmt":"2020-05-27T15:22:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sib.it\/?p=15349"},"modified":"2020-07-07T13:01:03","modified_gmt":"2020-07-07T13:01:03","slug":"parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/","title":{"rendered":"The byzantine opinion of the EPO\u2019s Enlarged Board of Appeal in case G-3\/19 \u201cPepper\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Is the European Patent Office entitled to introduce new rules that change the interpretation of EPC provisions? The answer of the EPO\u2019s own Enlarged Board of Appeal in case G-3\/19 “Pepper” is a masterpiece of byzantine wording.<\/em><\/p>\n

On 14 May 2020 the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) of the European Patent Office (EPO) issued its opinion in case G-3\/19<\/a> (hereinafter \u201cPepper\u201d), concerning the patentability under the European Patent Convention (EPC) of plants and animals obtained by an essentially biological process.\"G-3\/19<\/p>\n

Background<\/span><\/h2>\n

Under Article 53(b) EPC European patents cannot be granted for plant or animal varieties or essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals.<\/p>\n

In 2015 the EBA held, in decision G-2\/12<\/a> (hereinafter \u201cTomato II\u201d), that Article 53(b)\u2019s prohibition to grant European patents for essentially biological processes<\/u> for the production of plants or animals did not extend to the products<\/u> obtained by essentially biological processes (provided that they were not plant or animal varieties).<\/p>\n

The EBA\u2019s interpretation of Article 53(b) raised some objections in Europe, and in November 2016 the European Commission published a notice stating that although European Union legislation on biotechnological inventions (Directive 98\/44) does not exclude from patentability of plants and animals obtained by essentially biological processes, it was the European legislator\u2019s intention that such legislation should provide for such an exclusion.<\/p>\n

It must be noted here that the EPO is not a European Union institution, and that the European Patent Convention can be amended only by a diplomatic conference or by unanimous consent of all member states.<\/p>\n

However the Rules of the European Patent Convention\u2019s Implementing Regulations can be amended by the Administrative Council of the EPO.<\/p>\n

So in 2017 Rule 28 of the Implementing Regulations was amended by the A.C. with addition of point (2), to provide specifically that \u201cEuropean patents shall not be granted in respect of plants or animals exclusively obtained by means of an essentially biological process\u201d. The new rule took effect as from 1 July 2017 (read more here)<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In December 2018 the Technical Board of Appeal of the EPO held in its decision T-1063\/18<\/a> that a conflict existed between Art. 53 (b) EPC as interpreted by the EBA\u2019s decision in Tomato II and the new Rule 28(2) EPC as amended by the EPO\u2019s Administrative Council.<\/p>\n

The President of the EPO referred the case to the EBA.<\/p>\n

The EBA\u2019s opinion in \u201cPepper\u201d
\n<\/span><\/h2>\n

The question that the EPO\u2019s President referred to the EBA was essentially whether the Administrative Council is allowed to amend the Rules of the EPC\u2019s Implementing Regulations.<\/p>\n

The EBA considered the question too broad.<\/p>\n

Its somewhat surprising approach was therefore to reformulate the question before declaring it admissible. The question that the EBA considered admissible was, essentially, whether the interpretation of the provisions of the EPC can change pursuant to amendments of the Rules.<\/p>\n

The reformulation allowed the EBA to<\/strong> stand its ground on questions of principle<\/strong> while avoiding a head-on conflict with the Administrative Council<\/strong> and, indirectly, with the European Commission.<\/p>\n

Therefore the EBA\u2019s opinion in \u201cPepper\u201d on the one hand points out that the EPO is not bound by European Union law, and that answering the EPO President\u2019s original question positively would have been tantamount to admitting the possibility of circumventing the statutory procedures for amending the EPC itself.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, the EBA takes the view that Article 53(b) (which prohibits the patenting of essentially biological processes<\/u> for the production of plants or animals) is not incompatible with the amended Rule 28 (2), and that the interpretation of EPC provisions can change in time<\/strong>: \u201cwhen now interpreting Article 53(b) EPC\u201d the EBA \u201ccannot ignore\u201d the decision of the EPO\u2019s Administrative Council to amend Rule 28 of the Implementing Regulations, since \u201cthe legal and factual situation underlying decision G2-\/12 (Tomato II) has substantially changed\u201d.<\/p>\n

Therefore the EBA, while not disowning its own interpretation of Article 53(b) handed down in Tomato II, essentially admits that the previous interpretation of an Article of the EPC can be modified or even reversed pursuant to the amendment of a Rule of the Implementing Regulations<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Of course the byzantine approach of the EBA does not solve the problem that the interpretations of the Article 53(b) given in the \u201cTomato II\u201d and \u201cPepper\u201d cases are in conflict. Moreover, although the EBA declined to answer the original question, the \u201cPepper\u201d opinion of the EBA does appear to accept that the amendment by the EPO\u2019s Administrative Council of a Rule of the Implementing Regulation can completely reverse the meaning of a provision of the EPC, de facto<\/em> amending an EPC provision without the unanimous agreement of EPC member states, or the diplomatic conference, which the EPC statutory procedures require.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Is the European Patent Office entitled to introduce new rules that change the interpretation of EPC provisions? The answer of the EPO\u2019s own Enlarged Board of Appeal in case G-3\/19 “Pepper” is a masterpiece of byzantine wording. On 14 May 2020 the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) of the European Patent Office (EPO) issued its […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":15352,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false},"categories":[13],"tags":[],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nCaso G-3\/19 "Pepper", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Il parere G-3\/19 "Pepper" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Caso G-3\/19 "Pepper", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Il parere G-3\/19 "Pepper" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-05-27T15:22:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-07-07T13:01:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"333\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Laura Ercoli\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/\",\"name\":\"\",\"description\":\"Intellectual Property since 1882\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg\",\"width\":500,\"height\":333,\"caption\":\"G-3\/19 \\\"Pepper\\\"\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/\",\"name\":\"Caso G-3\/19 \\\"Pepper\\\", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2020-05-27T15:22:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-07-07T13:01:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#\/schema\/person\/3988cde84153da4b745510f0712d395b\"},\"description\":\"Il parere G-3\/19 \\\"Pepper\\\" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The byzantine opinion of the EPO\u2019s Enlarged Board of Appeal in case G-3\/19 \u201cPepper\u201d\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#\/schema\/person\/3988cde84153da4b745510f0712d395b\",\"name\":\"Laura Ercoli\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/40352aead1e319e41371a554b61ab9b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/40352aead1e319e41371a554b61ab9b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Laura Ercoli\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/author\/lercoli\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Caso G-3\/19 \"Pepper\", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO","description":"Il parere G-3\/19 \"Pepper\" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Caso G-3\/19 \"Pepper\", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO","og_description":"Il parere G-3\/19 \"Pepper\" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/","article_published_time":"2020-05-27T15:22:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-07-07T13:01:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":500,"height":333,"url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Laura Ercoli","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/","name":"","description":"Intellectual Property since 1882","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/flower_ladybird500-e1590592257334.jpg","width":500,"height":333,"caption":"G-3\/19 \"Pepper\""},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/","name":"Caso G-3\/19 \"Pepper\", il parere della Camera dei Ricorsi Allargata EPO","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2020-05-27T15:22:47+00:00","dateModified":"2020-07-07T13:01:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#\/schema\/person\/3988cde84153da4b745510f0712d395b"},"description":"Il parere G-3\/19 \"Pepper\" riguarda le regole sui brevetti europei per piante e animali ottenuti tramite processi essenzialmente biologici, leggi la notizia.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/flash-news\/italiano-il-parere-bizantino-della-camera-allargata-dei-ricorsi-epo-nel-caso-g-319-pepper\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The byzantine opinion of the EPO\u2019s Enlarged Board of Appeal in case G-3\/19 \u201cPepper\u201d"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#\/schema\/person\/3988cde84153da4b745510f0712d395b","name":"Laura Ercoli","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/40352aead1e319e41371a554b61ab9b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/40352aead1e319e41371a554b61ab9b8?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Laura Ercoli"},"url":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/author\/lercoli\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15349"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=15349"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15349\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15918,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/15349\/revisions\/15918"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/15352"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=15349"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=15349"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sib.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=15349"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}