T 1473/13 of 24.01.2019
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2019:T147313.20190124
- Date of decision
- 24 January 2019
- Case number
- T 1473/13
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 06751124.6
- IPC class
- H04N 5/44H04N 7/173
- 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
- APPARATUS, SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PROVIDING IN-BAND ATSC VESTIGIAL SIDEBAND SIGNALING OR OUT-OF-BAND SIGNALING
- Applicant name
- Rohde & Schwarz GmbH & Co. KG
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.5.04
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- blankECHR Art 6(1)blankGerman Basic Law Art 19(4)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(c)European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 125European Patent Convention Art 135(1)(b)European Patent Convention Art 83 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973European Patent Convention R 106European Patent Convention R 137(5)European Patent Convention R 14(1)European Patent Convention R 78(1)
- Keywords
- Amendments of application
Amendments - amended claims relating to unsearched subject-matter (no)
Claims - all requests
Claims - clarity (no)
Sufficiency of disclosure - (no)
Competence of the boards of appeal - appeal from decision of the examining division
Stay of proceedings because of constitutional complaints pending before the German Federal Constitutional Court (no) - Catchword
- 1. Discussion of a possible general principle for staying proceedings before the EPO boards of appeal beyond Rules 14 / 78 EPC and Article 112(3) EPC, together with the associated case law.
2. The appellant has not stated a case for a stay. It has not shown, in particular, that a decision by the German Federal Constitutional Court ("Bundesverfassungsgericht") on pending constitutional complaints ("Verfassungsbeschwerden") against certain decisions of the Boards of Appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal claiming "insufficient judicial relief at the EPO against a decision of the Boards of Appeal" could possibly have an impact on unrelated proceedings that are pending before the boards, such as the present proceedings.
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The request for stay of the appeal proceedings is refused.
2. The appeal is dismissed.