G 0003/95 (Inadmissible referral) vom 27.11.1995
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:1995:G000395.19951127
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 27. November 1995
- Aktenzeichen
- G 0003/95
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- -
- IPC-Klasse
- -
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- -
- Name des Antragstellers
- -
- Name des Einsprechenden
- -
- Kammer
- -
- Leitsatz
1. In Decision T 356/93 (OJ EPO 1995, 545) it was held that a claim defining genetically modified plants having a distinct, stable, herbicide-resistance genetic characteristic was not allowable under Article 53(b) EPC because the claimed genetic modification itself made the modified or transformed plant a "plant variety" within the meaning of Article 53(b) EPC.
2. This finding is not in conflict with the findings in either of Decisions T 49/83 (OJ EPO 1984, 112) or T 19/90 (OJ EPO 1990, 476).
3. Consequently, the referral of the question:
Does a claim which relates to plants or animals but wherein specific plant or animal varieties are not individually claimed contravene the prohibition on patenting in Article 53(b) EPC if it embraces plant or animal varieties?"
to the Enlarged Board of Appeal by the President of the EPO is inadmissible under Article 112(1)(b) EPC.
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(b) 1973European Patent Convention Art 53(b) 1973
- Schlagwörter
- Patentability of plant and animal varieties
No conflicting decisions
Inadmissible referral by the President of the EPO - Orientierungssatz
- -
- Zitierte Akten
- -
Conclusion
For these reasons, it is decided that:
The referral of the question of law set out in paragraph I above to the Enlarged Board of Appeal by the President of the EPO is inadmissible under Article 112(1)(b) EPC.