T 0774/05 du 08.11.2007
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T077405.20071108
- Date de la décision
- 8 novembre 2007
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0774/05
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 95116064.7
- Classe de la CIB
- B26D 1/00
- 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
- Slicing machine for slicing two or more food loaves
- Nom du demandeur
- Formax, Inc.
- Nom de l'opposant
- Weber Maschinenbau GmbH & Co. KG
CFS GmbH Kempten - Chambre
- 3.2.07
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 101(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 107 1973European Patent Convention Art 111(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 54 1973European Patent Convention Art 69(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 99(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 99(4) 1973European Patent Convention R 2(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 2(5) 1973European Patent Convention R 55(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 55(1)(c) 1973European Patent Convention R 56(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 65(2) 1973European Patent Convention R 84 1973Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 9
- Mots-clés
- Admissibility of oppositions - yes (points 1 and 2)
Admissibility of appeal I - yes (point 3)
Admissibility of appeal II - no (point 4)
Request for accompanying person to present parts of the case - refused (point 5)
Late request to derogate from language of proceedings - allowed (point 6)
Interpretation from that language into the language of the proceedings - not allowed (point 6)
Late filed documents - admitted (point 7)
Admissibility of ground of novelty for one appellant - yes (point 8)
Novelty (patent as granted) - no (point 10)
Remittal - yes (point 11)
Request to refer questions to Enlarged Board of Appeal - refused (point 12) - Exergue
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The appeal of opponent II is rejected as inadmissible.
2. The request to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is refused.
3. The decision under appeal is set aside and the case is remitted to the department of first instance for further prosecution.