Decision keyword:
Memory Device
Law applied:
EPC Art. 52(1), Art. 54(1), Art. 56, Art. 138(1)(a)
Summary:
An example of an embodiment does not normally permit a restrictive interpretation of the patent claim characterizing the invention in general. This also applies if all the exemplary embodiments shown in the patent specification have something in common, but this particular embodiment is not reflected in the patent claim.
Federal Supreme Court (BGH), Judgement of August 29, 2023 – X ZR 129/21 -
Download Judgment (machine translation)
Header: TobiasD_pixabay.com