T 0438/19 vom 27.06.2023
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2023:T043819.20230627
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 27. Juni 2023
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0438/19
- Online am
- 28. Juni 2023
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 11830390.8
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- T 0438/19 2025-10-15
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- Zusammenfassung von EPC2000 Art 054
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- SOLAR CELL SEALING MATERIAL, AND SOLAR CELL MODULE
- Name des Antragstellers
- Mitsui Chemicals, Inc.
Mitsui Chemicals ICT Materia, Inc. - Name des Einsprechenden
- Borealis GmbH
- Kammer
- 3.3.03
- Leitsatz
- -
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 100(b)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)European Patent Convention Art 54(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)
- Schlagwörter
- Document resubmitted with the statement of grounds of appeal - admitted (yes)
Sufficiency of disclosure (yes)
Inventive step
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
High Court of England and Wales TAKEDA UK LTD v F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG [2019] EWHC 1911 - Orientierungssatz
- The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of
Appeal for decision:
1. Is a product put on the market before the date of filing of a European patent application to be excluded from the state of the art within the meaning of Article 54(2) EPC for the sole reason that its composition or internal structure could not be analysed and reproduced without undue burden by the skilled person before that date?
2. If the answer to question 1 is no, is technical information about said product which was made available to the public before the filing date (e.g. by publication of technical brochure, non-patent or patent literature) state of the art within the meaning of Article 54(2) EPC, irrespective of whether the composition or internal structure of the product could be analysed and reproduced without undue burden by the skilled person before that date?
3. If the answer to question 1 is yes or the answer to question 2 is no, which criteria are to be applied in order to determine whether or not the composition or internal structure of the product could be analysed and reproduced without undue burden within the meaning of opinion G 1/92? In particular, is it required that the composition and internal structure of the product be fully analysable and identically reproducible?
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of
Appeal for decision:
1. Is a product put on the market before the date of filing of a European patent application to be excluded from the state of the art within the meaning of Article 54(2) EPC for the sole reason that its composition or internal structure could not be analysed and reproduced without undue burden by the skilled person before that date?
2. If the answer to question 1 is no, is technical information about said product which was made available to the public before the filing date (e.g. by publication of technical brochure, non-patent or patent literature) state of the art within the meaning of Article 54(2) EPC, irrespective of whether the composition or internal structure of the product could be analysed and reproduced without undue burden by the skilled person before that date?
3. If the answer to question 1 is yes or the answer to question 2 is no, which criteria are to be applied in order to determine whether or not the composition or internal structure of the product could be analysed and reproduced without undue burden within the meaning of opinion G 1/92? In particular, is it required that the composition and internal structure of the product be fully analysable and identically reproducible?