T 1040/04 (Floor covering/UNILIN) du 23.03.2006
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T104004.20060323
- Date de la décision
- 23 mars 2006
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 1040/04
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 00201515.4
- Classe de la CIB
- F16B 5/00E04F 15/04
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- Floor covering, consisting of hard floor panels
- Nom du demandeur
- Unilin Beheer B.V.
- Nom de l'opposant
- Otger Terhürne Holzwerke GmbH & Co. KG
Berry Finance N.V.
ROYSOL - Chambre
- 3.2.03
- Sommaire
The following question is referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
Can a patent which has been granted on a divisional application which did not meet the requirements of Article 76(1) EPC because at its actual date of filing it extended beyond the content of the earlier application, be amended during opposition proceedings in order to overcome the ground of opposition under Article 100(c) EPC and thereby fulfill said requirements?
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 100(c) 1973European Patent Convention Art 76(1) 1973
- Mots-clés
- Amendment of a patent granted on a divisional application -Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
- Exergue
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The following question is referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:
Can a patent which has been granted on a divisional application which did not meet the requirements of Article 76(1) EPC because at its actual date of filing it extended beyond the content of the earlier application, be amended during opposition proceedings in order to overcome the ground of opposition under Article 100(c) EPC and thereby fulfill said requirements?