T 0160/09 (Layered Architecture/ERICSSON) vom 20.06.2012
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T016009.20120620
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 20. Juni 2012
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0160/09
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 03711885.8
- IPC-Klasse
- G06F 9/40
- 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
- Layered architecture for mobile terminals
- Name des Antragstellers
- Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ)
- Name des Einsprechenden
- -
- Kammer
- 3.5.06
- Leitsatz
- -
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as amended after the Treaty of LisbonEPC Guidelines_for Examination, Version June 2005, C-VI, 1(2) and 1(3)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)European Patent Convention Art 125European Patent Convention R 104European Patent Convention R 106Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 11Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)
- Schlagwörter
- remittal in case of an adverse decision - no
additional argument in decision - substantial procedural violation (no)
change in composition of examining division before oral proceedings - procedural violation (no)
support by the description - main and 1st-15th auxiliary requests (no)
technical problem solved by the invention - 16th auxiliary request (no)
inventive step - 16th auxiliary request (no)
reimbursement of the appeal fee (no) - Orientierungssatz
- Request for remittal in case of an adverse decision, see reasons 1-2. Alleged substantial procedural violations, see reasons 3-14.
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The request for continuation of the proceedings in writing is rejected.
2. The objection under Rule 106 of 20 June 2012 is dismissed.
3. The appeal is dismissed.
4. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is rejected.