European Patent Office

T 1409/05 (Sequence of divisionals/SEIKO) du 30.03.2006

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T140905.20060330
Date de la décision
30 mars 2006
Numéro de l'affaire
T 1409/05
Requête en révision de
-
Numéro de la demande
01128824.8
Classe de la CIB
G09G 3/36
Langue de la procédure
Anglais
Distribution
Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
Téléchargement
Décision en anglais
Autres décisions pour cet affaire
T 1409/05 2007-07-18
Résumés pour cette décision
-
Titre de la demande
Liquid crystal device
Nom du demandeur
SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION
Nom de l'opposant
-
Chambre
3.4.03
Sommaire

The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:

(1) In the case of a sequence of applications consisting of a root (originating) application followed by divisional applications, each divided from its predecessor, is it a necessary and sufficient condition for a divisional application of that sequence to comply with Article 76(1) EPC, second sentence, that anything disclosed in that divisional application be directly, unambiguously and separately derivable from what is disclosed in each of the preceding applications as filed?

(2) If the above condition is not sufficient,

does said sentence impose the additional requirement

(a) that the subject-matter of the claims of said divisional be nested within the subject-matter of the claims of its divisional predecessors?

or

(b) that all the divisional predecessors of said divisional comply with Article 76(1) EPC?

Mots-clés
Compliance with Article 76(1) EPC for a sequence of divisional applications
According of a filing date
Content of the application
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
Exergue
-

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal:

(1) In the case of a sequence of applications consisting of a root (originating) application followed by divisional applications, each divided from its predecessor, is it a necessary and sufficient condition for a divisional application of that sequence to comply with Article 76(1) EPC, second sentence, that anything disclosed in that divisional application be directly, unambiguously and separately derivable from what is disclosed in each of the preceding applications as filed?

(2) If the above condition is not sufficient,

does said sentence impose the additional requirement

(a) that the subject-matter of the claims of said divisional be nested within the subject-matter of the claims of its divisional predecessors?

or

(b) that all the divisional predecessors of said divisional comply with Article 76(1) EPC?