Hitachi, Ltd.

T 0258/03-3.5.1 (2004)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
H
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Hitachi, Ltd.

European Patent Office Technical Board of Appeal
T 0258/03-3.5.1 (2004)

MP

Facts

Hitachi, Ltd. (plaintiff) sought to patent its computerized, automated auction system under the European Patent Convention (EPC). As part of its application, Hitachi attempted to register several aspects of its system for patents, claiming each of them as distinct inventions. First, Hitachi asserted that the method for executing an auction automatically via computer was an invention (Claim 1). Second, Hitachi asserted that the technical apparatus for executing that method on a server computer was an invention (Claim 3). The examining division held that Claim 1 was unpatentable under EPC Article 52 because its subject matter comprised a method—something that, under those provisions, did not qualify as an invention. It also held that Claim 3’s technical apparatus was unpatentable because this claim involved subject matter indistinguishable from the method in Claim 1. The division further concluded that even if any of the claims entailed subject matter capable of meeting Article 52’s invention requirement, they nevertheless failed the inventive-step test contained in EPC Article 56 and were excluded from patentability on those grounds. The European Patent Office’s board of appeal reviewed these determinations.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Intellectual Property

Key Terms