Skip to main content Skip to footer
HomeHome
 
  • Homepage
  • Searching for patents

    Patent knowledge

    Access our patent databases and search tools.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
      • European Publication Server
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
      • European Patent Bulletin
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
      • Web services
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
    • Technology platforms
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
      • Water innovation
      • Space innovation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
      • Firefighting technologies
      • Clean energy technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Overview
      • First time here?
      • Asian patent information
      • Patent information centres
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
    Image
    EPO TIR study-PV-web-720 x 237

    Technology insight report on advances in photovoltaics

  • Applying for a patent

    Applying for a patent

    Practical information on filing and grant procedures.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • European route
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Request for extension/validation
    • International route (PCT)
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide – PCT procedure at the EPO
      • EPO decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • Find a professional representative
    • MyEPO services
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
      • Get access
      • File with us
      • Interact with us on your files
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Forms
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Fees
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
      • International fees (PCT)
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
      • Fee payment and refunds
      • Warning

    UP

    Find out how the Unitary Patent can enhance your IP strategy

  • Law & practice

    Law & practice

    European patent law, the Official Journal and other legal texts.

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
      • Unitary patent system
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent
    • Court practices
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
    Image
    Law and practice scales 720x237

    Keep up with key aspects of selected BoA decisions with our monthly "Abstracts of decisions”

  • News & events

    News & events

    Our latest news, podcasts and events, including the European Inventor Award.

    Go to overview 

     

    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Overview
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the finalists
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
      • The 2025 event
    • Press centre
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • Innovation and patenting in focus
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
      • Green tech in focus
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
      • The future of medicine
      • Materials science
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
      • Patent classification
      • Digital technologies
      • The future of manufacturing
      • Books by EPO experts
    • "Talk innovation" podcast

    Podcast

    From ideas to inventions: tune into our podcast for the latest in tech and IP

  • Learning

    Learning

    The European Patent Academy – the point of access to your learning

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Overview
      • Learning activities
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Overview
      • EQE - European qualifying examination
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
      • National offices and IP authorities
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and technology transfer centres (TTOs)
    Image
    Patent Academy catalogue

    Have a look at the extensive range of learning opportunities in the European Patent Academy training catalogue

  • About us

    About us

    Find out more about our work, values, history and vision

    Go to overview 

    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Overview
      • Official celebrations
      • Member states’ video statements
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states of the European Patent Organisation
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
      • Administrative Council
    • Principles & strategy
      • Overview
      • Our mission, vision, values and corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
      • Towards a New Normal
    • Leadership & management
      • Overview
      • President António Campinos
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Overview
      • Environmental
      • Social
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Services & activities
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
      • Consulting our users
      • European and international co-operation
      • European Patent Academy
      • Chief Economist
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Overview
      • Technologies
      • Innovation actors
      • Policy and funding
      • Tools
      • About the Observatory
    • Procurement
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering and electronic signatures
      • Procurement portal
      • Invoicing
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Transparency portal
      • Overview
      • General
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
      • "Long Night"
    Image
    Patent Index 2024 keyvisual showing brightly lit up data chip, tinted in purple, bright blue

    Track the latest tech trends with our Patent Index

 
en de fr
  • Language selection
  • English
  • Deutsch
  • Français
Main navigation
  • Homepage
    • Go back
    • New to patents
  • New to patents
    • Go back
    • Your business and patents
    • Why do we have patents?
    • What's your big idea?
    • Are you ready?
    • What to expect
    • How to apply for a patent
    • Is it patentable?
    • Are you first?
    • Patent quiz
    • Unitary patent video
  • Searching for patents
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Technical information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Espacenet - patent search
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • National patent office databases
        • Global Patent Index (GPI)
        • Release notes
      • European Publication Server
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
        • Cross-reference index for Euro-PCT applications
        • EP authority file
        • Help
      • EP full-text search
    • Legal information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Register
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes archive
        • Register documentation
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Deep link data coverage
          • Federated Register
          • Register events
      • European Patent Bulletin
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Download Bulletin
        • EP Bulletin search
        • Help
      • European Case Law Identifier sitemap
      • Third-party observations
    • Business information
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • PATSTAT
      • IPscore
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Technology insight reports
    • Data
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technology Intelligence Platform
      • Linked open EP data
      • Bulk data sets
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Manuals
        • Sequence listings
        • National full-text data
        • European Patent Register data
        • EPO worldwide bibliographic data (DOCDB)
        • EP full-text data
        • EPO worldwide legal event data (INPADOC)
        • EP bibliographic data (EBD)
        • Boards of Appeal decisions
      • Web services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • European Publication Server web service
      • Coverage, codes and statistics
        • Go back
        • Weekly updates
        • Updated regularly
    • Technology platforms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Plastics in transition
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Plastics waste recovery
        • Plastics waste recycling
        • Alternative plastics
      • Innovation in water technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Clean water
        • Protection from water
      • Space innovation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Cosmonautics
        • Space observation
      • Technologies combatting cancer
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Prevention and early detection
        • Diagnostics
        • Therapies
        • Wellbeing and aftercare
      • Firefighting technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Detection and prevention of fires
        • Fire extinguishing
        • Protective equipment
        • Post-fire restoration
      • Clean energy technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Renewable energy
        • Carbon-intensive industries
        • Energy storage and other enabling technologies
      • Fighting coronavirus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Vaccines and therapeutics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Vaccines
          • Overview of candidate therapies for COVID-19
          • Candidate antiviral and symptomatic therapeutics
          • Nucleic acids and antibodies to fight coronavirus
        • Diagnostics and analytics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Protein and nucleic acid assays
          • Analytical protocols
        • Informatics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Bioinformatics
          • Healthcare informatics
        • Technologies for the new normal
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Devices, materials and equipment
          • Procedures, actions and activities
          • Digital technologies
        • Inventors against coronavirus
    • Helpful resources
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • First time here?
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Basic definitions
        • Patent classification
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC)
        • Patent families
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • DOCDB simple patent family
          • INPADOC extended patent family
        • Legal event data
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • INPADOC classification scheme
      • Asian patent information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • China (CN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Chinese Taipei (TW)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • India (IN)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
        • Japan (JP)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Korea (KR)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Grant procedure
          • Numbering system
          • Useful terms
          • Searching in databases
        • Russian Federation (RU)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Facts and figures
          • Numbering system
          • Searching in databases
        • Useful links
      • Patent information centres (PATLIB)
      • Patent Translate
      • Patent Knowledge News
      • Business and statistics
      • Unitary Patent information in patent knowledge
  • Applying for a patent
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • European route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Guide
      • Oppositions
      • Oral proceedings
        • Go back
        • Oral proceedings calendar
          • Go back
          • Calendar
          • Public access to appeal proceedings
          • Public access to opposition proceedings
          • Technical guidelines
      • Appeals
      • Unitary Patent & Unified Patent Court
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Unitary Patent
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Legal framework
          • Main features
          • Applying for a Unitary Patent
          • Cost of a Unitary Patent
          • Translation and compensation
          • Start date
          • Introductory brochures
        • Unified Patent Court
      • National validation
      • Extension/validation request
    • International route
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Euro-PCT Guide
      • Entry into the European phase
      • Decisions and notices
      • PCT provisions and resources
      • Extension/validation request
      • Reinforced partnership programme
      • Accelerating your PCT application
      • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH)
        • Go back
        • Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programme outline
      • Training and events
    • National route
    • MyEPO services
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Understand our services
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Exchange data with us using an API
          • Go back
          • Release notes
      • Get access
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Release notes
      • File with us
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • What if our online filing services are down?
        • Release notes
      • Interact with us on your files
        • Go back
        • Release notes
      • Online Filing & fee payment outages
    • Fees
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European fees (EPC)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • International fees (PCT)
        • Go back
        • Reduction in fees
        • Fees for international applications
        • Decisions and notices
        • Overview
      • Unitary Patent fees (UP)
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Decisions and notices
      • Fee payment and refunds
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Payment methods
        • Getting started
        • FAQs and other documentation
        • Technical information for batch payments
        • Decisions and notices
        • Release notes
      • Warning
    • Forms
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Request for examination
    • Find a professional representative
  • Law & practice
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Legal texts
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Convention
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Documentation on the EPC revision 2000
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • Diplomatic Conference for the revision of the EPC
            • Travaux préparatoires
            • New text
            • Transitional provisions
            • Implementing regulations to the EPC 2000
            • Rules relating to Fees
            • Ratifications and accessions
          • Travaux Préparatoires EPC 1973
      • Official Journal
      • Guidelines
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • EPC Guidelines
        • PCT-EPO Guidelines
        • Unitary Patent Guidelines
        • Guidelines revision cycle
        • Consultation results
        • Summary of user responses
        • Archive
      • Extension / validation system
      • London Agreement
      • National law relating to the EPC
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Archive
      • Unitary Patent system
        • Go back
        • Travaux préparatoires to UP and UPC
      • National measures relating to the Unitary Patent 
    • Court practices
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • European Patent Judges' Symposium
    • User consultations
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Ongoing consultations
      • Completed consultations
    • Substantive patent law harmonisation
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The Tegernsee process
      • Group B+
    • Convergence of practice
    • Options for professional representatives
  • News & events
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • News
    • Events
    • European Inventor Award
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the award
      • Categories and prizes
      • Meet the inventors
      • Nominations
      • European Inventor Network
        • Go back
        • 2024 activities
        • 2025 activities
        • Rules and criteria
        • FAQ
      • The 2024 event
    • Young Inventors Prize
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the prize
      • Nominations
      • The jury
      • The world, reimagined
      • The 2025 event
    • Press centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Index and statistics
      • Search in press centre
      • Background information
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • European Patent Office
        • Q&A on patents related to coronavirus
        • Q&A on plant patents
      • Copyright
      • Press contacts
      • Call back form
      • Email alert service
    • In focus
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Water-related technologies
      • CodeFest
        • Go back
        • CodeFest Spring 2025 on classifying patent data for sustainable development
        • Overview
        • CodeFest 2024 on generative AI
        • CodeFest 2023 on Green Plastics
      • Green tech in focus
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About green tech
        • Renewable energies
        • Energy transition technologies
        • Building a greener future
      • Research institutes
      • Women inventors
      • Lifestyle
      • Space and satellites
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patents and space technologies
      • Healthcare
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Medical technologies and cancer
        • Personalised medicine
      • Materials science
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
      • Mobile communications
      • Biotechnology
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Red, white or green
        • The role of the EPO
        • What is patentable?
        • Biotech inventors
      • Classification
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Nanotechnology
        • Climate change mitigation technologies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • External partners
          • Updates on Y02 and Y04S
      • Digital technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About ICT
        • Hardware and software
        • Artificial intelligence
        • Fourth Industrial Revolution
      • Additive manufacturing
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • About AM
        • AM innovation
      • Books by EPO experts
    • Podcast
  • Learning
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Learning activities and paths
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Learning activities: types and formats
      • Learning paths
    • EQE and EPAC
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • EQE - European Qualifying Examination
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compendium
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Paper F
          • Paper A
          • Paper B
          • Paper C
          • Paper D
          • Pre-examination
        • Candidates successful in the European qualifying examination
        • Archive
      • EPAC - European patent administration certification
      • CSP – Candidate Support Programme
    • Learning resources by area of interest
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent granting
      • Technology transfer and dissemination
      • Patent enforcement and litigation
    • Learning resources by profile
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Business and IP managers
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Innovation case studies
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • SME case studies
          • Technology transfer case studies
          • High-growth technology case studies
        • Inventor's handbook
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Introduction
          • Disclosure and confidentiality
          • Novelty and prior art
          • Competition and market potential
          • Assessing the risk ahead
          • Proving the invention
          • Protecting your idea
          • Building a team and seeking funding
          • Business planning
          • Finding and approaching companies
          • Dealing with companies
        • Best of search matters
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Tools and databases
          • EPO procedures and initiatives
          • Search strategies
          • Challenges and specific topics
        • Support for high-growth technology businesses
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Business decision-makers
          • IP professionals
          • Stakeholders of the Innovation Ecosystem
      • EQE and EPAC Candidates
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Paper F brain-teasers
        • Daily D questions
        • European qualifying examination - Guide for preparation
        • EPAC
      • Judges, lawyers and prosecutors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Compulsory licensing in Europe
        • The jurisdiction of European courts in patent disputes
      • National offices and IP authorities
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Learning material for examiners of national officers
        • Learning material for formalities officers and paralegals
      • Patent attorneys and paralegals
      • Universities, research centres and TTOs
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Modular IP Education Framework (MIPEF)
        • Pan-European Seal Young Professionals Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • For students
          • For universities
            • Go back
            • Overview
            • IP education resources
            • University memberships
          • Our young professionals
          • Professional development plan
        • Academic Research Programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Completed research projects
          • Current research projects
        • IP Teaching Kit
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Download modules
        • Intellectual property course design manual
        • PATLIB Knowledge Transfer to Africa
          • Go back
          • Core activities
          • Stories and insights
  • About us
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • The EPO at a glance
    • 50 years of the EPC
      • Go back
      • Official celebrations
      • Overview
      • Member states’ video statements
        • Go back
        • Albania
        • Austria
        • Belgium
        • Bulgaria
        • Croatia
        • Cyprus
        • Czech Republic
        • Denmark
        • Estonia
        • Finland
        • France
        • Germany
        • Greece
        • Hungary
        • Iceland
        • Ireland
        • Italy
        • Latvia
        • Liechtenstein
        • Lithuania
        • Luxembourg
        • Malta
        • Monaco
        • Montenegro
        • Netherlands
        • North Macedonia
        • Norway
        • Poland
        • Portugal
        • Romania
        • San Marino
        • Serbia
        • Slovakia
        • Slovenia
        • Spain
        • Sweden
        • Switzerland
        • Türkiye
        • United Kingdom
      • 50 Leading Tech Voices
      • Athens Marathon
      • Kids’ collaborative art competition
    • Legal foundations and member states
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Legal foundations
      • Member states
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Member states by date of accession
      • Extension states
      • Validation states
    • Administrative Council and subsidiary bodies
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Communiqués
        • Go back
        • 2024
        • Overview
        • 2023
        • 2022
        • 2021
        • 2020
        • 2019
        • 2018
        • 2017
        • 2016
        • 2015
        • 2014
        • 2013
      • Calendar
      • Documents and publications
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Select Committee documents
      • Administrative Council
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Composition
        • Representatives
        • Rules of Procedure
        • Board of Auditors
        • Secretariat
        • Council bodies
    • Principles & strategy
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Mission, vision, values & corporate policy
      • Strategic Plan 2028
        • Go back
        • Driver 1: People
        • Driver 2: Technologies
        • Driver 3: High-quality, timely products and services
        • Driver 4: Partnerships
        • Driver 5: Financial sustainability
      • Towards a New Normal
      • Data protection & privacy notice
    • Leadership & management
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • About the President
      • Management Advisory Committee
    • Sustainability at the EPO
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Environmental
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring environmental inventions
      • Social
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Inspiring social inventions
      • Governance and Financial sustainability
    • Procurement
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Procurement forecast
      • Doing business with the EPO
      • Procurement procedures
      • Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) publications
      • Sustainable Procurement Policy
      • About eTendering
      • Invoicing
      • Procurement portal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • e-Signing contracts
      • General conditions
      • Archived tenders
    • Services & activities
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Our services & structure
      • Quality
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Foundations
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • European Patent Convention
          • Guidelines for examination
          • Our staff
        • Enabling quality
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Prior art
          • Classification
          • Tools
          • Processes
        • Products & services
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
          • Continuous improvement
        • Quality through networking
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • User engagement
          • Co-operation
          • User satisfaction survey
          • Stakeholder Quality Assurance Panels
        • Patent Quality Charter
        • Quality Action Plan
        • Quality dashboard
        • Statistics
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Search
          • Examination
          • Opposition
        • Integrated management at the EPO
      • Consulting our users
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Standing Advisory Committee before the EPO (SACEPO)
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Objectives
          • SACEPO and its working parties
          • Meetings
          • Single Access Portal – SACEPO Area
        • Surveys
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Detailed methodology
          • Search services
          • Examination services, final actions and publication
          • Opposition services
          • Formalities services
          • Customer services
          • Filing services
          • Key Account Management (KAM)
          • Website
          • Archive
      • Our user service charter
      • European and international co-operation
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Co-operation with member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
        • Bilateral co-operation with non-member states
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Validation system
          • Reinforced Partnership programme
        • Multilateral international co-operation with IP offices and organisations
        • Co-operation with international organisations outside the IP system
      • European Patent Academy
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Partners
      • Chief Economist
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Economic studies
      • Ombuds Office
      • Reporting wrongdoing
    • Observatory on Patents and Technology
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technologies
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Innovation against cancer
        • Assistive robotics
        • Space technologies
      • Innovation actors
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Startups and SMEs
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Publications
        • Research universities and public research organisations
      • Policy and funding
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Financing innovation programme
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Our studies on the financing of innovation
          • EPO initiatives for patent applicants
          • Financial support for innovators in Europe
        • Patents and standards
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Publications
          • Patent standards explorer
      • Tools
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Deep Tech Finder
      • About the Observatory
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Work plan
    • Transparency portal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • General
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Annual Review 2024
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Executive summary
          • Driver 1 – People
          • Driver 2 – Technologies
          • Driver 3 – High-quality, timely products and services
          • Driver 4 – Partnerships
          • Driver 5 – Financial Sustainability
        • Annual Review 2023
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • 50 years of the EPC
          • Strategic key performance indicators
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
        • Annual Review 2022
          • Go back
          • Overview
          • Foreword
          • Executive summary
          • Goal 1: Engaged and empowered
          • Goal 2: Digital transformation
          • Goal 3: Master quality
          • Goal 4: Partner for positive impact
          • Goal 5: Secure sustainability
      • Human
      • Environmental
      • Organisational
      • Social and relational
      • Economic
      • Governance
    • Statistics and trends
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Statistics & Trends Centre
      • Patent Index 2024
        • Go back
        • Insight into computer technology and AI
        • Insight into clean energy technologies
        • Statistics and indicators
          • Go back
          • European patent applications
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Top 10 technical fields
              • Go back
              • Computer technology
              • Electrical machinery, apparatus, energy
              • Digital communication
              • Medical technology
              • Transport
              • Measurement
              • Biotechnology
              • Pharmaceuticals
              • Other special machines
              • Organic fine chemistry
            • All technical fields
          • Applicants
            • Go back
            • Top 50
            • Categories
            • Women inventors
          • Granted patents
            • Go back
            • Key trend
            • Origin
            • Designations
      • Data to download
      • EPO Data Hub
      • Clarification on data sources
    • History
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • 1970s
      • 1980s
      • 1990s
      • 2000s
      • 2010s
      • 2020s
    • Art collection
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • The collection
      • Let's talk about art
      • Artists
      • Media library
      • What's on
      • Publications
      • Contact
      • Culture Space A&T 5-10
        • Go back
        • Catalyst lab & Deep vision
          • Go back
          • Irene Sauter (DE)
          • AVPD (DK)
          • Jan Robert Leegte (NL)
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #1
          • Jānis Dzirnieks (LV) #2
          • Péter Szalay (HU)
          • Thomas Feuerstein (AT)
          • Tom Burr (US)
          • Wolfgang Tillmans (DE)
          • TerraPort
          • Unfinished Sculpture - Captives #1
          • Deep vision – immersive exhibition
          • Previous exhibitions
        • The European Patent Journey
        • Sustaining life. Art in the climate emergency
        • Next generation statements
        • Open storage
        • Cosmic bar
      • "Long Night"
  • Boards of Appeal
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Decisions of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Recent decisions
      • Selected decisions
    • Information from the Boards of Appeal
    • Procedure
    • Oral proceedings
    • About the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • President of the Boards of Appeal
      • Enlarged Board of Appeal
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Pending referrals (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Decisions sorted by number (Art. 112 EPC)
        • Pending petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
        • Decisions on petitions for review (Art. 112a EPC)
      • Technical Boards of Appeal
      • Legal Board of Appeal
      • Disciplinary Board of Appeal
      • Presidium
        • Go back
        • Overview
    • Code of Conduct
    • Business distribution scheme
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Technical boards of appeal by IPC in 2025
      • Archive
    • Annual list of cases
    • Communications
    • Annual reports
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
      • Go back
      • Abstracts of decisions
    • Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Archive
  • Service & support
    • Go back
    • Overview
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • FAQ
      • Go back
      • Overview
    • Publications
    • Ordering
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent Knowledge Products and Services
      • Terms and conditions
        • Go back
        • Overview
        • Patent information products
        • Bulk data sets
        • Open Patent Services (OPS)
        • Fair use charter
    • Procedural communications
    • Useful links
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Patent offices of member states
      • Other patent offices
      • Directories of patent attorneys
      • Patent databases, registers and gazettes
      • Disclaimer
    • Contact us
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Filing options
      • Locations
    • Subscription centre
      • Go back
      • Overview
      • Subscribe
      • Change preferences
      • Unsubscribe
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
    • RSS feeds
Board of Appeals
Decisions

Recent decisions

Overview
  • 2025 decisions
  • 2024 decisions
  • 2023 decisions
  1. Home
  2. T 1677/21 28-11-2023
Facebook X Linkedin Email

T 1677/21 28-11-2023

European Case Law Identifier
ECLI:EP:BA:2023:T167721.20231128
Date of decision
28 November 2023
Case number
T 1677/21
Petition for review of
-
Application number
07862596.9
IPC class
C08K 7/14
C08L 77/00
B65D 1/00
Language of proceedings
EN
Distribution
NO DISTRIBUTION (D)

Download and more information:

Decision in EN 386.87 KB
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the European Patent Register
Bibliographic information is available in:
EN
Versions
Unpublished
Application title

POLYAMIDE HOUSINGS FOR PORTABLE ELECTRONIC DEVICES

Applicant name
DuPont Polymers, Inc.
Opponent name
Solvay Specialty Polymers USA, LLC
Board
3.3.03
Headnote
-
Relevant legal provisions
European Patent Convention Art 111(1)
European Patent Convention Art 113(1)
EPC2000_Art_116(1)_(2007)_Sent_2
European Patent Convention R 103(1)(a)
European Patent Convention R 111(2)
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 11
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(6)
European Patent Convention Art 19(2)
Keywords

Right to be heard - opportunity to comment (no)

Right to be heard - substantial procedural violation (yes)

Reimbursement of appeal fee - equitable by reason of a substantial procedural violation (yes)

Late-filed evidence - should have been submitted in first-instance proceedings (no)

Late-filed evidence - admitted (yes)

Remittal to the department of first instance (yes)

Remittal - to be considered by a differently composed opposition division (no)

Catchword
-
Cited decisions
G 0005/91
T 1105/96
T 0071/99
T 0246/08
T 2475/17
Citing decisions
-

I. The appeal of the patent proprietor lies against the decision of the opposition division revoking European Patent number 2 089 466.

II. The following documents were inter alia cited in the decision of the opposition division:

D7: JP-A-2006/045390

D7a: Machine translation of D7

D11: WO 2006/122602 Al

III. The contested decision, as far as it is relevant to the present appeal, can be summarised as follows:

- requests for postponement of the oral proceedings were not allowed;

- the subject-matter of granted claim 1 did not involve an inventive step over D11 in combination with D7a. The same conclusion applied to claim 1 of auxiliary requests III to XII;

- auxiliary requests I and II were not admitted into the proceedings and the request to file a further auxiliary request was rejected.

IV. The patent proprietor (appellant) filed an appeal against said decision. With the statement of grounds of appeal, the appellant filed five sets of claims as auxiliary requests 1 to 5.

V. With the rejoinder to the statement of grounds of appeal, the opponent (respondent) filed the following document:

D7b: Human translation of D7

VI. The parties were summoned to oral proceedings and a communication pursuant to Article 15(1) RPBA indicating specific issues to be discussed at the oral proceedings was then sent to the parties. In view of the preliminary opinion expressed therein, the parties were informed that the Board intended, inter alia, to remit the case to the opposition division for further prosecution and to order the reimbursement in full of the appeal fee (point 10.1 of the communication). The exact wording of the Board's preliminary intention is repeated below:

"... the Board intends to:

(i) set aside the contested decision,

(ii) admit document D7b into the proceedings and remit the case to the opposition division for further prosecution (see Article 116(1), second sentence, EPC referred to above under point 8.),

(iii) dismiss the appellant's request to order a change of the opposition division and

(iv) order the reimbursement in full of the appeal fee."

VII. With letter dated 27 October 2023, the appellant withdrew its request for oral proceedings under the condition that the Board maintains its preliminary opinion, in particular that a written decision as summarised in point 10.1 of the Board's communication be issued.

VIII. By letter dated 16 November 2023, the respondent stated that they did not consider oral proceedings to be necessary if the Board were to issue a written decision in accordance with point 10.1 of said communication. Oral proceedings were requested only if the Board intended to deviate therefrom.

IX. In view of these letters the Board cancelled oral proceedings.

X. The requests of the parties, as resulting from the written submissions, were as follows:

(a) The appellant requested that the decision under appeal be set aside and that the patent be maintained as granted, or, in the alternative, that the patent be maintained in amended form on the basis of one of auxiliary requests 1 to 5 filed with the statement of grounds of appeal.

In addition, the appellant requested reimbursement of the appeal fee. In the event that the present case is remitted to the department of first instance, it was requested that an opposition division be entrusted, where all members who participated in the first instance proceedings were excluded.

(b) The respondent requested dismissal of the appeal.

The respondent further requested that:

document D7b be admitted into the proceedings and

the appellant's request to entrust a different opposition division be rejected.

XI. Claim 1 as granted read as follows:

"1. A portable electronic device housing comprising a polyamide composition comprising a melt-mixed blend of (A) at least one thermoplastic polyamide and (B) at least one fibrous reinforcing agent having a non-circular cross section, wherein the thermoplastic polyamide is selected from the group consisting of polyamide 6,6; polyamide 4,6; polyamide 6,10; polyamide 6,12; polyamide 11; polyamide 12; polyamide 9,10; polyamide 9,12; polyamide 9,13; polyamide 9,14; polyamide 9,15; polyamide 6,16; polyamide 9,36; polyamide 10,10; polyamide 10,12; polyamide 10,13; polyamide 10,14; polyamide 12,10; polyamide 12,12; polyamide 12,13; polyamide 12,14; polyamide 6,14; polyamide 6,13; polyamide 6,15; polyamide 6,16; and copolymers and mixtures of these polymers, wherein the thermoplastic polyamide (A) comprises 30 to 75 weight percent of the polyamide composition."

The remaining granted claims as well as the claims of auxiliary requests 1 to 5 are not relevant to this decision.

XII. The appellant's submissions, in so far as they are pertinent to the present decision, may be derived from the reasons for the decision below. They were essentially as follows:

(a) Reimbursement of the appeal fee

The appeal fee should be refunded due to fundamental procedural violations, in particular in relation to the discussion on document D7a.

(b) Admittance of document D7b

D7b was late-filed and should not be admitted into the proceedings.

(c) Change of the composition of the opposition division

In the event of a remittal of the case to the department of first instance, the composition of the opposition division should be changed.

XIII. The respondent's submissions, in so far as they are pertinent to the present decision, may be derived from the reasons for the decision below. They were essentially as follows:

(a) Reimbursement of the appeal fee

The appellant should have studied in detail the content of document D7a before the oral proceedings.

(b) Admittance of document D7b

D7b should be admitted into the proceedings.

(c) Change of the composition of the opposition division

The composition of the opposition division should not be changed.

1. Decision in written proceedings

1.1 The appellant withdrew its request for oral proceedings on the condition that a decision as summarised under point 10.1 of the Board's preliminary opinion is issued. The respondent requested oral proceedings only in case the Board intended to deviate therefrom.

1.2 In its preliminary assessment of the case, which had been communicated to the parties, the Board has fully taken into account the parties' submissions. Since the Board, following its preliminary assessment, issues a decision as summarised under point 10.1 of the communication under Article 15(1) RPBA, the principle of the right to be heard according to Article 113(1) EPC has been observed without the need to hold oral proceedings.

2. Reimbursement of the appeal fee

2.1 The appellant requests that the appeal fee be reimbursed because of fundamental procedural violations (see pages 18 to 20 of the statement of grounds of appeal). The reasons therefore are the following:

2.1.1 Violation of the right to be heard (Article 113(1) EPC)

According to the appellant, the decision to revoke the patent is essentially based on the disclosure of D7 and in particular on the table in paragraph [0047]. However, said table is in Japanese and it was not provided in an official language of the EPO. The appellant could therefore not be expected to understand the content of the table. Despite the requests of the appellant, the opposition division (i) did not postpone the oral proceedings and (ii) did not allow the appellant to file further auxiliary requests.

The denial of these requests amounted to a violation of the proprietor's right to be heard, in breach of Article 113(1) EPC.

2.1.2 Inadequate reasoning of the decision (Rule 111(2) EPC)

The decision of the opposition division refers to paragraphs [0044] to [0048] of D7a to conclude that "example 1 of D7a has improved warpage/curvature, surface smoothness and impact strength as compared to comparative example 2". The appellant holds that this conclusion cannot be derived from these paragraphs of D7a.

Therefore the opposition division drew a conclusion which is either completely wrong or based on hindsight, thereby contradicting Rule 111(2) EPC.

2.2 The respondent pointed out that D7a, a machine translation of D7, was filed with the notice of opposition. However, the patentee neither objected before the oral proceedings that D7a was not suitable for use in the opposition proceedings nor filed an improved translation of D7 with the statement of grounds of appeal. Furthermore, the respondent considers that the appellant could have presented their arguments with regard to D7/D7a during opposition proceedings.

2.3 Under Rule 103(1)(a) EPC, the appeal fee shall be reimbursed in full where the Board of Appeal deems an appeal to be allowable, if such reimbursement is equitable by reason of a substantial procedural violation.

The right to be heard is a fundamental procedural right intended to ensure that no party is caught unawares by reasons given in a decision turning down its request on which it has not had the opportunity to comment. A decision which fails to take into account the arguments submitted by a party and which is based on a ground on which the party had no opportunity to present its comments, contravenes Article 113(1) EPC and constitutes a procedural violation (see Case Law of the Boards of Appeal, 10th edition 2022, in the following "Case Law", V.A.11.6.8).

Likewise the obligation to provide adequate reasoning in a decision in accordance with Rule 111(2) EPC is closely linked to the principle of the right to be heard under Article 113 EPC. A failure to do so is to be considered a procedural violation justifying the reimbursement of the appeal fee (see Case Law, V.A.11.6.9 and III.K.3.4.2). The reasoning given in a decision has to enable the appellant and the Board of appeal to examine whether the decision was justified or not (see Case Law, III.K.3.4.3 and 3.4.4). In contrast, whether the reasons provided are convincing or whether a misinterpretation of a prior art document was made has nothing to do with a procedural violation, but it rather constitutes an error of judgement, which as such does not provide a basis for the reimbursement of the appeal fee.

Furthermore, the seriousness of a procedural violation derives from its adverse effects. In particular, a violation must have played a decisive part in the decision in order to be considered substantial (see Case Law, V.A.11.6.2). A procedural violation which would not have led to a different outcome of the proceedings is not a substantial procedural violation.

2.4 The first question to be answered by the Board is whether under the present circumstances the right to be heard of the appellant was infringed and, if yes, whether it was decisive for the decision.

In this respect, the Board agrees with the appellant.

2.4.1 It is first noted that the patent was revoked essentially for lack of inventive step starting from D11 as the closest prior art in combination with D7a (see contested decision, page 24, point III.5.; page 25, point VI.4.; page 26, points VII.2. and VIII.2. etc.).

In the reasoning of the opposition division, a central consideration was that D7a taught that the warpage, impact strength and surface appearance of a reinforced polyamide composition could be improved by using flat glass fibers instead of circular glass fibers (see decision, page 24, first and second paragraphs). This consideration is based on the comparison between example 1 and comparative example 2 and is derived from paragraphs [0044] to [0048] of D7a (emphases here and below added by the Board). On this basis, the opposition division concluded that it was obvious for the skilled person to replace the circular glass fibers of D11 by flat glass fibers as suggested by D7a.

2.4.2 However, such an extensive consideration of the examples of D7a was not addressed in the opposition division's preliminary opinion, nor elsewhere in the written proceedings by any party, but was thoroughly taken into account in the decision and apparently only during the oral proceedings. The Board also agrees with the appellant that the alleged teaching of D7a cannot be derived from paragraphs [0044] to [0048]. It is in particular pointed out that these paragraphs are silent about any comparison between example 1 and comparative example 2. Instead, paragraphs [0048] merely compares example 1 to comparative example 1 which both contain flat glass fiber or comparative example 2 to comparative example 3 which both contain circular glass fiber. A comparison between flat and circular glass fibers is however not present in D7a.

2.4.3 In the Board's view, the reasoning of the opposition division can only be followed, i.e. example 1 can only be compared to comparative example 2, if the table on page 8 of D7 is actually taken into consideration. This table, which was explicitly referred to by the opponent during the oral proceedings, is, however, absent in D7a and therefore not available in English (see contested decision, page 9, point I.3.3 of the Reasons and D7a, paragraph [0047]). This table was also addressed for the first time during the oral proceedings. For these reasons, the decision is based on facts and evidence on which the patentee had had no opportunity to present their comments because the patentee could not be expected to provide comments before the oral proceedings and the relevant facts were not provided in an official language of the EPO. This constitutes a violation of the appellant's right to be heard.

2.4.4 As a consequence of this first procedural violation, a further violation of the proprietor's right to be heard was committed by refusing the request to postpone the oral proceedings and to admit further auxiliary requests (see decision under appeal, points I.3.3 and I.7.2 of the Reasons). This is particularly the case in view of the fact that the proprietor has been deprived of the possibility of filing further auxiliary requests before they have been filed and even before the auxiliary requests already filed have been examined. It is established jurisprudence of the Boards of appeal that a refusal of consent to amend made in advance of any amendment being submitted is an unlawful exercise of discretion pursuant to Rule 137(3) EPC and is ipso facto a substantial procedural violation (see e.g. T 0246/08, point 3 of the Reasons and T 1105/96, points 1 and 4 of the Reasons). Before a decision can be taken on an auxiliary request (therefore also on its admittance), the main request and all preceding auxiliary requests must be examined and decided upon as long as such preceding requests have not been withdrawn, and are therefore still pending.

In view of the fact that the content of the table in D7 was decisive for the assessment of lack of inventive step, and that this became apparent only at the oral proceedings, the proprietor should have been given sufficient time to prepare its arguments after having been provided with a translation of the relevant part of the document and to file further auxiliary requests.

2.4.5 Furthermore, contrary to the respondent's view, the Board does not hold that the patentee should have raised an objection with regard to D7a before the oral proceedings. Indeed, the relevance of the table of D7 was never mentioned in the written proceedings leading to the decision, not even by the then opponent. The patentee had therefore no reason to raise any objection as to the translation of D7.

2.4.6 Eventually, it was not disputed between the parties that the assessment of inventive step based on D11 in combination with D7a played a decisive part in the decision to revoke the patent and that a different outcome of the proceedings would have resulted from a different assessment of that issue.

2.5 In these circumstances, the decision to revoke the patent is based on a ground on which the patentee has not had an adequate opportunity to comment or to amend the patent, in breach of Article 113(1) EPC, which constitutes a substantial procedural violation. The appellant was obliged to file this appeal to ensure a hearing of counter-arguments, so that reimbursement of the appeal fee in full is clearly equitable (Rule 103(1)(a) EPC).

2.6 In view of the above, it is not necessary to decide on the second alleged issue raised by the appellant, i.e. whether the decision was adequately reasoned (in accordance with Rule 111(2) EPC).

3. Admittance of document D7b

3.1 D7b is a new item of evidence filed by the respondent with the rejoinder to the statement of grounds of appeal. Its admission to the proceedings, which is contested by the appellant, is subject to the discretionary power of the Board in accordance with Article 12 paragraphs (4) to (6) RPBA.

3.2 This document is a human translation of document D7 including the translation of the table in paragraph [0047].

3.3 The admittance of D7b is contested by the appellant for the following reasons (see letter dated 29 October 2022, page 4, point 2.3):

D7b should have been submitted during opposition proceedings (given that the machine translation D7a was incomplete);

the respondent did not explain why this document could not be provided earlier.

3.4 For the Board, it is clear that document D7b, the human translation of D7, was filed to meet the appellant's criticism that the machine translation D7a was incomplete, and in particular that the table in paragraph [0047] of D7 was not translated. Considering that the accuracy of the translation of D7a was never disputed during the earlier proceedings, the respondent had no reason to file a human translation of D7 during the proceedings before the opposition division. The Board is furthermore of the view that this document should also be admitted to the proceedings in order to allow a proper revision of the appealed decision on the point which led to the substantial procedural violation.

3.5 Under these circumstances, the Board finds it appropriate to exercise its discretion under Article 12(6) RPBA by admitting document D7b into the proceedings.

4. Remittal

Under Article 11 RPBA, the presence of a substantial procedural violation constitutes a special reason for remitting the case to the department of first instance for further prosecution according to Article 111(2) EPC.

In this regard it is noted that the parties have no right to further oral proceedings before the department of first instance on the same issues (Article 116(1) EPC, second sentence). Therefore as regards the granted claims, the conclusions of the opposition division regarding added subject-matter, sufficiency of disclosure and novelty are not to be revised by the opposition division.

5. Request to change the composition of the opposition division - Suspected partiality of the opposition division

5.1 The appellant requested that the composition of the opposition division be changed for the following reasons:

(a) the opposition division made a high number of procedural errors,

(b) the attitude of the opposition division was biased and

(c) the decision had already been made before the oral proceedings (see page 21, point 7 of the statement of grounds of appeal and letter dated 29 October 2022, pages 18 and 19).

5.2 In that respect the present Board preliminarily notes that while the boards have no formal power to decide the composition of the opposition division (see T 0071/99, Reasons 4), they may still do so in case of a clear procedural error as to the composition of the division under Article 19(2) EPC, or if, in the presence of a violation of the right to be heard, it is concluded that the composition is the real cause of the violation of the right to be heard, and that such violation can only be remedied by a change of composition, i.e. in particular in a case where there is a legitimate concern that one or more members of the first instance body are biased. However, the mere fact that the right to be heard has been violated is not sufficient to justify such a concern of an objective fear of partiality (see also T 2475/17, Reasons 3.1.5). It is further recalled that the requirement of impartiality applies in principle also to employees of the departments of the first instance of the EPO taking part in decision-making activities affecting the rights of any party (G 5/91, Headnote 1.).

5.3 With regard to the present case, the Board however fails to find any circumstance supporting the objection of the suspected partiality of the opposition division, either in consideration of its composition under Article 19 EPC or of the behaviour of its members (see also Case Law, V.A.11.6.12), and therefore agrees with the respondent (see point 2.8 of the rejoinder to the statement of grounds of appeal). Indeed the appellant did not raise any objection of suspected partiality during the opposition proceedings.

5.3.1 First, in the Board's view, the use of an untranslated part of D7 for the first time at the oral proceedings to deny an inventive step was the main error, which resulted in the chain of violations of the appellant's right to be heard during the oral proceedings.

5.3.2 Secondly, the Board has no reason to hold that this main error was intentional or that the opposition division was biased. While it is true that the opposition division indicated on several occasions its preliminary opinion (see points 3.3.1 to 3.3.3 and 4.1.1. of the minutes), this is a common practice which is used to streamline the discussion and make the oral proceedings more efficient. In any case, in the absence of other facts supporting the opposite, this practice is not an indication that the opposition division had already taken a decision before the oral proceedings and was not prepared to change it. As a matter of fact, although the opposition division indicated its negative preliminary opinion as far as auxiliary requests III to XII were concerned, the minutes of the oral proceedings show that these requests were nevertheless discussed in detail from 18:27 until the end of exceptionally long oral proceedings at 21:38 (see minutes, points 7.5 to 17.2). Furthermore, as pointed out by the respondent, with the summons to oral proceedings the opposition division indicated that they considered D2 to take away the novelty of granted claim 1 but came to the opposite conclusion during the oral proceedings (see communication accompanying the summons, point 4.1.2 and contested decision, page 19, first to fifth paragraphs). Last but not least, it is noted that the conclusion of the opposition division with regard to the objections under Article 100(a) (for lack of novelty), (b) and (c) EPC were in favour of the patentee (see points III.2. to III.4.1 of the decision).

5.3.3 Thus, the Board cannot recognise any bias of the opposition division in the conduct of the oral proceedings and has no reason to suspect, based on the present submissions, that the appellant would not have a fair re-hearing, should the case be remitted before the same opposition division. Under these circumstances, the Board has no elements to order a new composition of the opposition division after remittal.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The case is remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution.

3. The request to order a change of the composition of the opposition division is rejected.

4. The appeal fee is reimbursed in full.

Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility