T 0300/89 (Polyesters) vom 11.04.1990
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:1990:T030089.19900411
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 11. April 1990
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0300/89
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 85308381.4
- IPC-Klasse
- C08G 63/58
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- -
- Name des Antragstellers
- Minnesota Mining
- Name des Einsprechenden
- -
- Kammer
- 3.3.01
- Leitsatz
1. Even if it is possible for an Examining Division to envisage amendments which might enable progress towards grant, the burden lies upon an applicant (if he so wishes) to propose amendments (including by way of auxiliary requests) which overcome the objections raised by the Examining Division, in the observations in reply to the first communication under Article 96(2) EPC in which such objections are raised.
2. If an applicant wishes to avoid the risk of an adverse decision being issued without oral proceedings being appointed, he should request oral proceedings at the latest in his observations in reply to the first communication under Article 96(2) EPC.
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 113 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 96 1973European Patent Convention R 51 1973European Patent Convention R 67 1973
- Schlagwörter
- Novelty (no)
Product defined by a product-by-process claim involving three reactants without specific reaction conditions not novel with regard to prior art mentioning the same reactants
Rejection after one communication
Request for telephone call left unanswered - no procedural violation - Orientierungssatz
- -
- Zitierte Akten
- -
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The main request and the first auxiliary request are rejected.
3. The case is remitted to the Examining Division for further prosecution on the basis of Claim 1 of set C - the second auxiliary request - filed on 29 March 1989.
4. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is rejected.