In its decision of July 17, 2024, the Board of Appeal 3.5.05 found that the mere derivation of further data from medical measurements does not constitute a technical effect.
In the application appeal proceedings, the applicant had argued that there was a technical effect because new data was generated. Further data is generated from existing medical measurement data by determining and displaying maximum/minimum glucose values. According to the interpretation of the Board of Appeal, this data serves to support a doctor in his purely intellectual decision-making phases of diagnosis and therapy. Due to its predominantly non-technical nature, such a marker could not contribute to the technical character of the invention.
The Board of Appeal stated that it did not agree with the previous decision T 2681/16. In particular, when using the term “measurement”, a distinction must be made between an actual technical measurement and a purely cognitive process. The Board of Appeal also explicitly contradicts an example in the Guidelines for Examination (G-II, 3.3) by taking the view that the automatic provision of a medical diagnosis has no technical character whatsoever.
This decision shows once again that special attention must be paid when drafting applications dealing with data processing. MSP has prosecuted and defended countless computer-implemented inventions and data processing inventions in multi-party proceedings. If you have any questions in this area, our experts will be happy to assist you.