Guidelines for Examination
PART C
CHAPTER IV PATENTABILITY
9. Inventive step
9.12 Dependent claims; claims in different categories
 

HOME

E  /  D   /  F

 

 
 
PART C
CHAPTER IV PATENTABILITYCHAPTER IV PATENTABILITY
9. Inventive step9. Inventive step
  9.11a Selection inventions9.11a Selection inventions     9.13 Examples9.13 Examples  
 

9.12

Dependent claims; claims in different categories

 

If an independent claim is new and non-obvious, there is no need to investigate the novelty and the non-obviousness of any claims dependent thereon, except in situations where the subject-matter of a dependent claim has a later effective date than the independent claim and intermediate documents are to be considered (see V, 2.4.3).

 

Similarly, if a claim to a product is new and non-obvious there is no need to investigate the novelty and non-obviousness of any claims for a process which inevitably results in the manufacture of that product or of any claims for a use of that product. In particular, analogy processes, i.e. processes which themselves would otherwise not involve an inventive step, are nevertheless patentable insofar as they provide a novel and inventive product (see T 119/82, OJ 5/1984, 217). It should, however, be noted that in cases where the product, process and use claims have different effective dates, a separate examination as to novelty and inventive step may still be necessary in view of intermediate documents.