T 1080/01 (Thermostable enzyme/F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) vom 24.10.2003
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2003:T108001.20031024
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 24. Oktober 2003
- Aktenzeichen
- T 1080/01
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 87307433.0
- IPC-Klasse
- C12N 15/10
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- An die Kammervorsitzenden verteilt (C)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Keine AB-Links gefunden
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- Purified thermostable enzyme and process for amplifying, detecting, and/or cloning nucleic acid sequences using said enzyme
- Name des Antragstellers
- F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG
- Name des Einsprechenden
- New England Biolabs Inc.
Bioline (UK) Ltd
Promega Corporation
Becton, Dickinson and Company - Kammer
- 3.3.08
- Leitsatz
- -
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 104(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 114(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention Art 83 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973European Patent Convention Art 87 1973European Patent Convention R 23c 1973European Patent Convention R 57a 1973
- Schlagwörter
- Main request: allowability of amendments (no)
Auxiliary request: allowability of amendments (yes)
Entitlement of claim 1 to the earlier priority date (yes)
Clarity (yes)
Sufficiency of disclosure (yes)
Novelty (yes)
Inventive step (yes)
Apportionment of costs (no) - Orientierungssatz
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the first instance with the order to maintain the patent on the basis of:
- claims 1 to 28 of the auxiliary request filed at oral proceedings for the designated states BE, CH, LI, DE, FR, GB, GR, IT, LU, NL and SE,
- claims 1 to 51 of the auxiliary request filed at oral proceedings for the designated states AT and ES,
- amended description filed at oral proceedings, and
- drawings as originally filed.
3. The request for apportionment of costs is refused.