IPO Both applications relate to providing a better model of a process control system by determining compensation and error models. Given that the applications were a parent and divisional application, the matter was dealt with at the same hearing. The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel test and decided that the contribution identified in both applications did not extend beyond the model itself and lay entirely within the programmable model and hence was excluded under Section 1(2)(c) of the Act as computer programs. The Hearing Officer also considered the signposts set out in the decisions in ATandT Knowledge Ventures LP and CVON and HTC Europe Co. Ltd. v Apple Inc and concluded that as the model was abstract and provided no control or effect on the process control system, this confirmed that it was a program as such. Consequently, both applications were refused as no more than programs for a computer as such.
Mrs C L Davies
[2016] UKIntelP o12416, GB1011185.4 and GB 1500021.9
Bailii
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.561316