The Enlarged Board of Appeal stated that intermediate findings of diagnostic relevance must not be confounded with diagnosis for curative purposes stricto sensu, which consisted in attributing the detected deviation to a particular clinical picture. It followed that a method for obtaining such results or findings did not constitute a sufficient basis for denying patentability by virtue of Art. 52(4) EPC 1973. To decide otherwise would give rise to such a broad interpretation of the scope of the exclusion from patentability with regard to diagnostic methods – that it could hardly be reconciled with the requirement of legal certainty.