Although the claims were held to be inventions within the meaning of Article 52(1), (2) and (3) EPC, they were found to lack inventive step. The application was refused. More precisely, the invention was viewed as a mixture of technical and non-technical features, and was assessed with respect to the requirement of inventive step by taking account only the features which contributing to a technical character (in accordance with the principles of T 641/00). No step of the claimed method was found to be designed "in such a way as to be particularly suitable for being performed on a computer" so that it may have contribute in a technical manner to inventive step. A particular method step which may have been a candidate involving technical contribution was found by the Board to result from "a routine programming measure well within the reach of the skilled person". See also G 3/08, opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal List of decisions of the EPO Boards of Appeal relating to Article 52(2) and (3) EPC Software patents under the European Patent Convention References External links Decision T 258/03 on the "EPO boards of appeal decisions" section of the EPO web site Software patent case law European Patent Office case law 2004 in case law 2004 in Europe Auction case law