T 0386/04 du 09.01.2007
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T038604.20070109
- Date de la décision
- 9 janvier 2007
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0386/04
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 97100051.8
- Classe de la CIB
- E02F 9/22
- 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
- Hydraulic drive system for construction machines
- Nom du demandeur
- HITACHI CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY CO.,LTD.
- Nom de l'opposant
- LINDE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
- Chambre
- 3.2.03
- Sommaire
An appellant-proprietor, whose patent has been revoked, is entitled to seek maintenance of the patent as granted even though its main request before the opposition division had only been the maintenance of the patent in more limited form. The exception to this is where to allow the proprietor to revert to the amended claims would amount to an abuse of procedure. This long-standing principle is not contradicted by decisions T 528/93 or T 840/93, which are concerned with new claims raising new issues, and is not contrary to the statement by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decision G 9/91 concerning the purpose of an appeal. Observed: In this context, there is no procedural logic in distinguishing between cases in which the patent has been revoked and cases in which the patent has been maintained.
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
- Mots-clés
- Admissibility of main request (yes)
Novelty (yes)
Inventive step (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 opposition division with the order to maintain the patent as granted.