T 0998/23 of 21.10.2024
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2024:T099823.20241021
- Date of decision
- 21 October 2024
- Case number
- T 0998/23
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 10834964.8
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- No distribution (D)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- METHOD OF MAKING A COATED ABRASIVE ARTICLE HAVING SHAPED ABRASIVE PARTICLES AND RESULTING PRODUCT
- Applicant name
- 3M Innovative Properties Company
- Opponent name
- Saint-Gobain Abrasives, Inc.
- Board
- 3.2.07
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 100(a)European Patent Convention Art 100(b)European Patent Convention Art 100(c)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention Art 83European Patent Convention R 124(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(6)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 015(1)
- Keywords
- Late-filed objection - admitted in first-instance proceedings (no)
Late-filed objection - error in use of discretion at first instance (no)
Late-filed objection - admitted (no)
Grounds for opposition - insufficiency of disclosure (no)
Grounds for opposition - lack of patentability (no)
Sufficiency of disclosure - (yes)
Novelty - (yes)
Inventive step - (yes)
Minutes of oral proceedings - essentials of oral proceedings
Minutes of oral proceedings - request to record statement in the minutes (refused)
Amendment after notification of Art. 15(1) RPBA communication (yes)
Amendment after notification of Art. 15(1) RPBA communication - cogent reasons (no)
Amendment after notification of Art. 15(1) RPBA communication - exceptional circumstances (no)
Amendment after notification of Art. 15(1) RPBA communication - taken into account (no) - Catchword
- -
- Citing cases
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The patent is maintained as granted.