T 1157/01 (Hydrotreating catalyst/SUMITOMO) du 01.09.2004
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2004:T115701.20040901
- Date de la décision
- 1 septembre 2004
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 1157/01
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 96919968.6
- Classe de la CIB
- C10G 45/08
- 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
- Hydrotreating catalyst: composition, preparation, and use thereof
- Nom du demandeur
- Nippon Ketjen Co., Ltd.
- Nom de l'opposant
- -
- Chambre
- 3.3.06
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 111(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 113(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 133 1973European Patent Convention Art 134 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention Art 84 1973European Patent Convention R 67 1973
- Mots-clés
- Proper representation of the Appellant (yes) - deficiency under Article 133(2) overcome
Novelty (yes) - no clear and unambiguous overlap with products of the prior art
Inventive step (yes) - unexpected benefits in spite of a warning in the prior art to the contrary
Substantial procedural violation (yes) - no appealable decision on the Appellant's higher-ranking requests
Remittal for further prosecution (no) - examining proceedings already delayed - decision about patentability without undue investigation by the Board - 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 with the order to grant a patent in the following version:
Description:
Pages 1 to 3 and 5 to 33 as originally filed. Page 4 filed with letter of 25 June 2004.
Claims:
No. 1 to 9 received during the oral proceedings held on 30. January 2004.
3. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is allowed.