IPO The application relates to retrieving data from a remote computer using e-mail. A local computer sends a first e-mail containing machine-readable retrieval criteria and the remote computer responds with an e-mail containing the requested data. The Hearing Officer applied the Aerotel/Macrossan test and decided that the contribution made by the invention fell solely within excluded matter. He also considered the decisions in IGT/Acres Gaming , Gemstar v Virgin and in ATandT Knowledge Ventures LP and CVON and concluded that the contribution did not have a relevant technical effect. The application was refused as no more than a program for a computer as such.
Judges:
Mr S Brown
Citations:
GB1014714.8, [2013] UKIntelP o05613
Links:
Statutes:
Cited by:
Appeal from – Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks PatC 4-Sep-2013
Peter Prescott QC J set out the four steps to be taken: ‘The approach is in four steps:
‘(1) properly construe the claim;
(2) identify the actual contribution;
(3) ask whether it falls solely within the excluded subject matter;
At IPO – Lantana Ltd v The Comptroller General of Patents, Design and Trade Marks CA 13-Nov-2014
The inventor company appealed against rejection of its application for a patent for a computer program.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘on the facts found by the Hearing Officer, the invention is no more than the computerisation of a process which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.472215