T 0803/17 vom 21.06.2022
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T080317.20220621
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 21. Juni 2022
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0803/17
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 06709968.9
- IPC-Klasse
- A61B 19/00
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Nicht verteilt (D)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Keine AB-Links gefunden
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- SURGICAL PLANNING
- Name des Antragstellers
- KINGS COLLEGE LONDON
Depuy International Limited - Name des Einsprechenden
- Calibre Search Ltd.
- Kammer
- 3.2.02
- Leitsatz
- -
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 106(2)European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention R 99(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)
- Schlagwörter
- Admissibility of appeal - appeal sufficiently substantiated (yes)
Admissibility of opposition
Appeal decision - extent of examination
Appeal decision - reformatio in peius
Late-filed evidence - submitted shortly before oral proceedings
Late-filed evidence - admitted (no)
Novelty - (yes)
Inventive step - (yes) - Orientierungssatz
- The yardstick for determining whether the position of an appellant is, because of its own appeal, worsened in a way which is incompatible with the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in peius is the order of the decision under appeal, in particular the order's legal effect on the appellant.
If an opposition is considered inadmissible in the appeal proceedings, an appellant whose opposition was rejected in the decision under appeal as unallowable would not be in a worse position than if it had not appealed, as in both cases the patent would be maintained as granted. The legal reasons leading to this result, including whether the opposition is rejected as inadmissible or unallowable, do not fall within the scope of the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in peius (Reasons 3.5).
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.