●● IRC: #techbytes @ Techrights IRC Network: Sunday, February 18, 2024 ●● ● Feb 18 [04:45] *Noisytoot has quit (Ping timeout: 2m30s) [04:46] *Noisytoot (~noisytoot@tkbibjhmbkvb8.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [07:00] *Guest9974 has quit (Z-lined) ● Feb 18 [08:16] *SaphirJD (~SaphirJD@8xcwfwxvphczn.irc) has joined #techbytes [08:45] *parsifal (~parsifal@uuar9r28yasyu.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [12:20] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes [12:22] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has joined #techbytes [12:32] *psydroid2 (~psydroid@u8ftxtfux23wk.irc) has joined #techbytes ● Feb 18 [14:50] *psydruid (~psydruid@jevhxkzmtrbww.irc) has left #techbytes ● Feb 18 [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/02/board-of-appeal-proposes-substantially.html?showComment=1708194188194#c5657733492549046567 [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] "" [15:20] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Board of Appeal proposes a substantially broader definition of "substance or composition" in second medical use claiming (T 1252/20) - The IPKat [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] "'Electro-convulsive shocks for the therapy of ...
'Electro-convulsive shocks for the therapy of mental disorders' is clearly a method of treatment, so not patentable. The device used for producing the shocks is clearly a device. Define it as a composition using the molecular structure of its components without referring to structure/shape, and I'll give you a patent monopoly myself." [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2024/02/board-of-appeal-proposes-substantially.html?showComment=1708183345106#c6512015673161777448 [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] "In the past I have written and filed an application on the use of (a specific form of) electric stimulation for providing therapeutic effects. Although the application was withdrawn because the applicant lost interest, it would have been interesting to have the discussion on a first or second medical use in respect of this technology. I would guess that on basis of what the board now has said in T 1252/20 and on basis of the comme [15:20] schestowitz[TR2] nts of Daniele Thomas, this claim could have been successful.
What would you think: would nowadays a claim such as 'Electro-convulsive shocks for the therapy of mental disorders' be patentable (of course when novel and inventive)?' [15:20] -TechBytesBot/#techbytes-ipkitten.blogspot.com | Board of Appeal proposes a substantially broader definition of "substance or composition" in second medical use claiming (T 1252/20) - The IPKat ● Feb 18 [18:00] *parsifal has quit (Quit: Leaving) ● Feb 18 [21:56] *psydroid2 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 5.0.0 Aria http://www.kvirc.net/)