T 0190/99 of 06.03.2001

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T019099.20010306
Date of decision: 6 March 2001
Case number: T 0190/99
Petition for review of: -
Application number: 91301994.9
IPC class: A44B 19/40
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: Woven slide fastener stringer
Applicant name: YKK Corporation
Opponent name: Opti Patent,- Forschungs- und Fabrikations- AG
Board: 3.2.04
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions: European Patent Convention Art 123(3) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 56 1973 European Patent Convention Art 69(1) 1973
Keywords: Extension of scope of protection - no
Inventive step - yes
Catchword: The skilled person when considering a claim should rule out interpretations which are illogical or which do not make technical sense. He should try, with synthetical propensity i.e. building up rather than tearing down, to arrive at an interpretation of the claim which is technically sensible and takes into account the whole disclosure of the patent (Article 69 EPC). The patent must be construed by a mind willing to understand not a mind desirous of misunderstanding.
Cited cases: T 0108/91 T 0214/91
Citing cases: T 0437/98 T 0799/98 T 0898/99 T 0098/00 T 0173/00 T 0340/00 T 0343/00 T 0368/00 T 0793/00 T 0920/00 T 1084/00 T 0025/01 T 0118/01 T 0285/01 T 0423/01 T 0500/01 T 0034/02 T 0326/02 T 0493/02 T 0533/02 T 0809/02 T 1002/02 T 1022/02 T 1067/02 T 0032/03 T 0528/03 T 0759/03 T 0859/03 T 0868/03 T 0961/03 T 1241/03 T 0286/04 T 0423/04 T 0669/04 T 1341/04 T 1408/04 T 0100/05 T 0146/05 T 0288/05 T 0465/05 T 0666/05 T 0086/06 T 0142/06 T 0250/06 T 0300/06 T 0317/06 T 0334/06 T 0405/06 T 1204/06 T 1771/06 T 0218/07 T 0762/07 T 0787/07 T 0837/07 T 0898/07 T 1202/07 T 1269/07 T 1898/07 T 2020/07 T 0177/08 T 0339/08 T 0523/08 T 0589/08 T 0692/08 T 0824/08 T 1260/08 T 1582/08 T 1610/08 T 1660/08 T 2126/08 T 0106/09 T 0159/09 T 1071/09 T 1188/09 T 2101/09 T 2244/09 T 0154/10 T 1000/10 T 1084/10 T 1460/10 T 1860/10 T 1147/11 T 1171/11 T 1179/11 T 1190/11 T 1419/11 T 1574/11 T 1606/11 T 1903/11 T 2242/11 T 2480/11 T 1009/12 T 1614/12 T 1704/12 T 1954/12 T 1993/12 T 0260/13 T 0548/13 T 1019/13 T 1739/13 T 1889/13 T 1921/13 T 2002/13 T 2204/13 T 2329/13 T 0005/14 T 0076/14 T 0451/14 T 0460/14 T 0619/14 T 0640/14 T 0842/14 T 1029/14 T 1188/14 T 1900/14 T 0002/15 T 0209/15 T 0459/15 T 0825/15 T 0916/15 T 1089/15 T 1146/15 T 1477/15 T 2058/15 T 2350/15 T 0275/16 T 1127/16 T 1946/16 T 2697/16 T 0749/17 T 1379/17 T 1455/17 T 1524/17 T 2166/17 T 2255/18 T 0391/19 T 1190/19 T 2420/19 T 0367/20 T 0056/21 T 1531/21 T 0010/22 T 0439/22 T 0447/22 T 0865/22 T 1502/22 T 2237/22 T 2450/22 T 2451/22 T 0644/23 T 2000/23 T 2025/23 T 2047/23

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is dismissed.