R 0005/16 (Petition clearly unallowable) du 24.10.2016
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2016:R000516.20161024
- Date de la décision
- 24 octobre 2016
- Numéro de l'affaire
- R 0005/16
- Requête en révision de
- T 0403/13 2015-10-06
- Numéro de la demande
- 07700163.4
- Classe de la CIB
- A61L 24/08
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Distribuées aux présidents et aux membres des chambres de recours (B)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- LAYERED ADHESIVE CONSTRUCTION WITH ADHESIVE LAYERS HAVING DIFFERENT HYDROCOLLOID COMPOSITION
- Nom du demandeur
- Coloplast A/S
- Nom de l'opposant
- Hollister Incorporated
- Chambre
- -
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 100(a)European Patent Convention Art 100(b)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(c)European Patent Convention Art 112a(4)European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention Art 83European Patent Convention R 106European Patent Convention R 107European Patent Convention R 109(2)(a)Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 13Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 14(2)
- Mots-clés
- Fundamental violation of the right to be heard (no)
- Exergue
- A party to appeal proceedings should be aware of the methodology established in the case law of the boards of appeal for examining inventive step and should be prepared to submit its relevant arguments in this respect (Reasons, point 18).
A mere subjective surprise of a party in respect of an issue in the reasoning of the decision under review, which the party objectively could have known and on which the party was given an opportunity to comment, does not in itself amount to a violation of Article 113(1) EPC (Reasons, point 19).
Order
The Enlarged Board of Appeal as composed under Rule 109(2)(a) EPC unanimously decides:
The petition for review is rejected as clearly unallowable.