European Patent Office

T 0872/09 vom 08.04.2014

Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
ECLI:EP:BA:2014:T087209.20140408
Datum der Entscheidung
8. April 2014
Aktenzeichen
T 0872/09
Antrag auf Überprüfung von
-
Anmeldenummer
01924446.6
Verfahrenssprache
Englisch
Verteilung
An die Kammervorsitzenden verteilt (C)
Amtsblattfassungen
Keine AB-Links gefunden
Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
-
Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
-
Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
RAPID RESPONSE GLUCOSE SENSOR
Name des Antragstellers
Diabetes Diagnostics, Inc.
Name des Einsprechenden
Roche Diagnostics GmbH
Kammer
3.4.02
Leitsatz
-
Relevante Rechtsnormen
European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention R 106Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)
Schlagwörter
Novelty - (no)
Novelty - ambiguous feature
Late-filed request - admitted (no)
Late-filed request - request not defended before opposition division
Orientierungssatz
1. Novelty
The claimed sensor is defined by reference to characteristics of its response when used in a measurement set-up. Since none of the determining aspects of the measurement set-up is defined in claim 1, the technical features of the claimed sensor which are responsible for providing the measurement referred to in the claim remain obscure.
Legal certainty requires that a claimed subject-matter cannot be regarded as novel over the prior art on the basis of an ambiguous feature. Hence, defining a functional feature of the claimed sensor under undefined operating conditions is not appropriate to provide any distinction of the claimed sensor over the prior art sensors (see points 1.2 and 1.3 of the Reasons)
2. Admittance of auxiliary requests
None of the patentee's auxiliary requests were admitted into the proceedings because the patentee, during the first-instance opposition proceedings, deliberately chose not to defend any single auxiliary request, even though it was aware of the fact that its main request had not been found allowable by the opposition division (see points 2 and 3 of the Reasons).

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The objection under Rule 106 EPC is dismissed.

2. The appeal is dismissed.