T 0048/04 of 18.10.2006
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T004804.20061018
- Date of decision
- 18 October 2006
- Case number
- T 0048/04
- Online on
- 26 February 2007
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 96200038.6
- IPC class
- B65G 25/06
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen (C)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Loading floor for lorries or trailers
- Applicant name
- Cargomac B.V.
- Opponent name
- Hyva International B.V.
Keith International GmbH - Board
- 3.2.07
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention Art 83 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973European Patent Convention Art 100(a) 1973European Patent Convention Art 100(b) 1973European Patent Convention Art 104(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 111(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 113(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 123 1973European Patent Convention R 65 1973European Patent Convention R 67 1973
- Keywords
- Admissibility of appeals (yes)
Admissibility of new requests (partially)
Admissibility of late filed prior art (partially)
Slide presentation (partially admitted)
Novelty (main request - no)
Inventive step (third auxiliary request - yes)
Reimbursement of appeal fee (no)
Apportionment of costs (no) - Catchword
- -
- Cited cases
- -
- Citing cases
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The appeals of appellant 01 and of appellant 02 are admissible.
2. The decision under appeal is set aside.
3. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with the order to maintain the patent in the following version:
Description: columns 1 to 10 of the patent specification
Claims: 1 to 8 of the auxiliary request 3 filed with letter of 25 August 2006
Drawings: 1 to 6 of the patent specification
4. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is refused.
5. The request for apportionment of costs is refused.