T 0857/06 (TNF binding protein II/YEDA) of 05.06.2008
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T085706.20080605
- Date of decision
- 5 June 2008
- Case number
- T 0857/06
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 90109337.7
- IPC class
- C12P 21/02
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen and members (B)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Tumor necrosis factor binding protein II, its purification and antibodies thereto
- Applicant name
- YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD.
- Opponent name
- ABBOTT GmbH & Co. KG
- Board
- 3.3.04
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Court of Human Rights judgements Borgers v. Belgium of 30 October 1991, Kress v. France of 7 June 2001 and Martinie v. France of 12 April 2006, England and Wales Court of Appeal judgement Parker v. The Law Society of 4 December 1998European Patent Convention Art 106(2)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(b)European Patent Convention Art 54(3)European Patent Convention Art 83 1973Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 19(1)
- Keywords
- Presence of assistant at deliberations (yes)
Appealability of interlocutory decision (yes)
Added subject-matter (no)
Sufficiency of disclosure (yes)
Novelty (yes) - Catchword
- 1. The discretion under Article 19(1), second sentence, RPBA may be exercised to allow the board's assistant to attend and to take part in the deliberations (see points 1 to 6).
2. A first interlocutory decision which does not allow a separate appeal can be appealed together with a second interlocutory decision which does not leave any substantive issues outstanding and which allows a separate appeal (see points 7 to 11). - Citing cases
- T 1954/14
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decisions under appeal are set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with the order to maintain the patent in amended form on the basis of claims 1 to 33 of the new main request filed with the grounds of appeal of appellant I and a description yet to be adapted.