T 0144/09 of 04.05.2011

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T014409.20110504
Date of decision: 4 May 2011
Case number: T 0144/09
Petition for review of: -
Application number: 99113776.1
IPC class: B66B 11/00
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: Traction sheave elevator
Applicant name: Kone Corporation
Opponent name: INVENTIO AG
ORONA E.I.C S. Coop.
Otis Elevator Company
Board: 3.2.06
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions: European Patent Convention Art 104(1)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 112a European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 113(2)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention R 100(1)European Patent Convention R 106Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 16(1)(e)
Keywords: Main request and first, second, fourth and sixth auxiliary requests - not admitted (Art. 12(4) RPBA)
Third auxiliary request - added subject-matter (Art. 123(2) EPC)
Fifth auxiliary request - not admitted (Art. 13(1) RPBA)
Referral of question to Enlarged Board of Appeal - rejected
Objection under Rule 106 EPC - dismissed
Apportionment of costs - requests rejected
Catchword: 1. A request can be held inadmissible under Article 12(4) RPBA when added subject-matter held unallowable during proceedings before the opposition division is not removed at least by way of an auxiliary request filed in those proceedings, but only by way of a request filed during the appeal proceedings (Reasons 1.4).
2. The applicability of Article 12(4) RPBA is not restricted by the time limit for filing the grounds of appeal or any reply thereto (Reasons 1.17).
Cited cases: G 0001/95 G 0001/05 J 0015/85 T 0910/92 T 0545/01 T 1854/08
Citing cases: T 1178/08 T 0848/09 T 0872/09 T 0936/09 T 1062/09 T 2001/09 T 1132/10 T 1499/10 T 1616/10 T 0134/11 T 0273/11 T 0301/11 T 0840/11 T 1400/11 T 2046/11 T 2244/11 T 2315/11 T 2485/11 T 0154/12 T 0247/12 T 1162/12 T 2009/12 T 2598/12 T 0163/13 T 1578/13 T 1906/13 T 0618/14 T 0692/14 T 0796/14 T 1632/14 T 0874/16 T 2486/18 T 2702/19

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The objection of the appellant under Rule 106 EPC is dismissed.

2. The request of the respondent/opponent OII for referral of a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is rejected.

3. The appeal is dismissed.

4. The requests of the opponents for apportionment of costs are rejected.