T 1760/11 ((-)-Omeprazole Mg/ASTRAZENECA) of 13.11.2012
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T176011.20121113
- Date of decision
- 13 November 2012
- Case number
- T 1760/11
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 00108480.5
- IPC class
- C07D 401/12A61P 1/04A61K 31/44
- 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
- T 1760/11 (-)--'Omeprazole Mg/ASTRAZENECA 2012-11-16
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Magnesium salt of the (-)-enantiomer of omeprazole and its use
- Applicant name
- AstraZeneca AB
- Opponent name
- Hexal AG
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
Mepha AG
STADA Arzneimittel AG
Pinewood Laboratories Limited
ETHYPHARM
Actavis Group hf.
Lupin Limited
Zentiva a.s.
Generics [UK] Limited
Ratiopharm GmbH
lA Pharma GmbH
Hexal Pharma GmbH
Hörnchen, Ulrich, Dr. - Board
- 3.3.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 100(b)European Patent Convention Art 100(c)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(c)European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention Art 24(3)European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention Art 87European Patent Convention R 106Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)
- Keywords
- Admissibility of first partiality objection (yes), second (no)
Res judicata (no)
Main request, added matter (yes)
Auxiliary request 1, allowable
Added matter (no)
Sufficiency (yes), starting material retrievable from Chemical Abstracts
Novelty (yes), specific salt
Inventive step (yes), post-published evidence (yes), unexpected advantage
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (no)
Objection under Rule 106 EPC dismissed - Catchword
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with the order to maintain the patent with the following claims and a description to be adapted if necessary:
Claim(s): No. 1 to 13 of the auxiliary request 1 filed with the letter dated 6 April 2011 and received on 7 April 2011.
3. The request for referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal of 15 November 2012 is rejected.
4. The objection of 16 November 2012 under Article 24(3) EPC is rejected as inadmissible.
5. The objection of 15 November 2012 under Rule 106 EPC is dismissed.