Claim 1 of the patent application contained the feature that ‘the device is adapted to generate L addresses, which are smaller in number than N = Ng × 2m2 virtual addresses for reading data from said interleaver memory in which L data bits are stored’. The Board of Appeal noted that it might be true that claim 1 did not imply anything about optimal choices of m and Ng. However, according to the present Board, it is not a requirement of the European Patent Convention, and in particular not of Article 84 EPC, that the claims should specify the optimum way of carrying out the invention.

A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law.


To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Patent Blog, please subscribe here.

Kluwer IP Law