T 1212/97 (Immunoglobulin preparations/GENENTECH) of 14.05.2001
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T121297.20010514
- Date of decision
- 14 May 2001
- Case number
- T 1212/97
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 84302368.0
- IPC class
- C12N 15/13
- 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
- Recombinant immunoglobulin preparations, methods for their preparation, DNA sequences, expression vectors and recombinant host cells therefor
- Applicant name
- Genentech, Inc., et al
- Opponent name
- Bristol-Myers Company
Roche Diagnostics GmbH
Protein Design
Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.
Celltech Limited - Board
- 3.3.04
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention Art 83 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973
- Keywords
- Oral presentation - state of the art (no)
Main request - claim 1 - sufficiency of disclosure (no)
Main request - claim 16 - novelty (no)
First auxiliary request - claim 1- sufficiency of disclosure (no)
Second auxiliary request - novelty (yes)
Inventive step (yes)
Adaptation of the description - Catchword
- The information content made publicly available by a lecture cannot be put beyond reasonable doubt by any evidence of the lecturer alone, as the lecturer is in a quite different position to a member of the audience (see point 3 ff).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The Appellant's main and first auxiliary requests are refused.
3. The claim of the second auxiliary claim request meets the requirements of the European Patent Convention.
4. The matter is remitted to the first instance with the order to maintain the patent on the basis of the claim of the second auxiliary request submitted at oral proceedings on 26 May 2000, pages 1 to 23 of the description submitted as auxiliary request at oral proceedings on 14 May 2001, and the drawings as granted.
5. The request for re-imbursement of the appeal fee is refused.