T 0681/01 du 28.11.2006
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T068101.20061128
- Date de la décision
- 28 novembre 2006
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0681/01
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 97307021.2
- Classe de la CIB
- D06P 1/44
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Distribuées aux présidents des chambres de recours (C)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- A treated fabric, a method of treatment and a window covering product comprising such material
- Nom du demandeur
- HUNTER DOUGLAS INDUSTRIES B.V.
- Nom de l'opposant
- 01: Junkers + Müllers GmbH
02: LOUVER-LITE Ltd - Chambre
- 3.3.07
- Sommaire
(1) Article 69 EPC and the protocol thereto cannot be relied on to read into the claim an implicit restrictive feature not suggested by the explicit wording of the claim (see point 2.1.1)
(2) There must be something in the circumstances that suggests that a confidential relation existed before a delivery which appears to be the result of an ordinary commercial transaction can be disregarded as not making the delivered goods available to a member of the public.
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 111 1973European Patent Convention Art 123 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 69 1973European Patent Convention Art 83 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973European Patent Convention R 57a 1973
- Mots-clés
- Claim construction - reliance on Article 69 EPC to restrict claim (no)
Prior use - confidentiality (no)
Novelty - Main request, first auxiliary request (no)
Amendment allowable (Article 123(2)EPC) - second auxiliary request (no)
Novelty third auxiliary request over particular prior use (yes)
Remittal (yes) - Exergue
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the first instance for further prosecution on the basis of the seven claims filed as Third Auxiliary Request at the oral proceedings on 28 November 2006.