Please wait...



Goto Application


Disclaimer The image version (PDF) available on PATENTSCOPE is the official version. This online html version is provided to assist users. Despite the great care taken in its compilation to ensure a precise and accurate representation of the data appearing on the printed document/images, errors and/or omissions cannot be excluded due to the data transmittal, conversion and inherent limitations of the (optional) machine translation processes used. Hyperlinks followed by this symbol , are to external resources that are not controlled by WIPO. WIPO disclaims all liability regarding the above points.

International application No. Applicant's or agent's file reference
PCT/EP2019/057310 B16121WO/AO
International filing date (day/month/year) (Earliest) Priority Date (day/month/year) Date of mailing (day/month/year)
22 March 2019 01 October 2019
International Patent Classification (IPC) or both national classification and IPC
     A61B 34/20 (2016.01)i; A61B 90/00 (2016.01)i
This International Searching Authority hereby declares, according to Article 17(2)(a), that no international search report will be established on the international application for the reasons indicated below.
The subject matter of the international application relates to:
scientific theories
mathematical theories
plant varieties
animal varieties
essentially biological processes for the production of plants and animals, other than microbiological processes and the products of such processes
schemes, rules or methods of doing business
schemes, rules or methods of performing purely mental acts
schemes, rules or methods of playing games
methods for treatment of the human body by surgery or therapy
methods for treatment of the animal body by surgery or therapy
diagnostic methods practised on the human or animal body
mere presentations of information
computer programs for which this International Searching Authority is not equipped to search prior art
The failure of the following parts of the international application to comply with prescribed requirements prevents a meaningful search from being carried out:
 the description  the claims  the drawings
A meaningful search could not be carried out without the sequence listing; the applicant did not, within the prescribed time limit:
furnish a sequence listing in the form of an Annex C/ST.25 text file, and such listing was not available to the International Searching Authority in a form and manner acceptable to it; or the sequence listing furnished did not comply with the standard provided for in Annex C of the Administrative Instructions.
furnish a sequence listing on paper or in the form of an image file complying with the standard provided for in Annex C of the Administrative Instructions, and such listing was not available to the International Searching Authority in a form and manner acceptable to it; or the sequence listing furnished did not comply with the standard provided for in Annex C of the Administrative Instructions.
pay the required late furnishing fee for the furnishing of a sequence listing in response to an invitation under Rule 13ter.1(a) or (b).
4. Further comments:
Non-establishment of opinion with regard to novelty, inventive step and industrial applicability
Within the framework of EPO PCT Guidelines section B-VIII.3.3 concerning an informal clarification where no meaningful search appears possible, the applicant was contacted on September 17, 2019.
The applicant was informed that the claims, taking into account the description and drawings, appear to fail to comply with the requirements of sufficiency of disclosure (Art.5 PCT) to such an extent that currently no meaningful search can be made.
In a telephone conversation (see minutes of informal clarification) the applicant provided additional information and clarifications.
However, even when taking into account these clarifications and additional information, the application falls within the " exceptional situation[s] in which no search at all is possible for a particular claim, for example where the description, the claims or the drawings are totally unclear " (GL/ISPE 9.01 corresponding to EPO PCT GL B-VIII.3), since crucial steps (in particular how the step of matching the virtually determined reference point onto the real world is performed) necessary to solve the problem provided by the applicant are not disclosed in the application and are still unknown, such that the substantive requirements, in particular novelty and inventive step, cannot be assessed for compliance with the PCT.
Insufficiency of disclosure (PCT Art. 5)
Based on the above argued lack of information it is considered that the criteria for a sufficient disclosure are not met (PCT Art.5 and GL/ISPE 5.45, 5.51 corresponding to PCT-EPO GL F-III1), which require that "at least one way of carrying out the invention must be given. [...T]he description must disclose any feature essential for carrying out the invention in sufficient detail to render it apparent to the skilled person how to put the invention into practice". Therefore, the application does not place the skilled person in possession of at least one way of putting the claimed invention into practice (GL/ISPE 5.45, 5.51 corresponding to PCT-EPO GL F-III.1 and decision by Boards of Appeal T3/17).
Without the information on how to realize the crucial step of matching the virtual and real world in order to solve the before mentioned technical problem, it is impossible to carry out a meaningful search in the meaning of GL/ISPE 9.01 (corresponding to PCT-EPO GL B-VII.3) in that "the term "meaningful search" in Article 17(2)(a)(ii) should be read to include a search that within reason is complete enough to determine whether the claimed invention complies with the substantive requirements, that is, the novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability requirements, and/or the sufficiency, support and clarity requirements of Articles 5 and 6" for the set of claims. Since the features solving the alleged problem are unknown, such features cannot be compared to a prior art document in order to provide an opinion on novelty or inventive step with regard to PCT
The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that claims relating to inventions in respect of which no international search report has been established need not be the subject of an international preliminary examination (Rule 66.1(e) PCT). The applicant is advised that the EPO policy when acting as an International Preliminary Examining Authority is normally not to carry out a preliminary examination on matter which has not been searched. This is the case irrespective of whether or not the claims are amended following receipt of the search report or during any Chapter II procedure. If the application proceeds into the regional phase before the EPO, the applicant is reminded that a search may be carried out during examination before the EPO (see EPO Guidelines C-IV, 7.2), should the problems which led to the Article 17(2) declaration be overcome.
Name and mailing address of the ISA/:
European Patent Office
P.B. 5818, Patentlaan 2, 2280 HV Rijswijk,
Telephone No. (+31-70)340-2040
Facsimile No. (+31-70)340-3016
Authorized officer:
L├╝ddemann, Tobias