T 0857/06 (TNF binding protein II/YEDA) du 05.06.2008
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T085706.20080605
- Date de la décision
- 5 juin 2008
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0857/06
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 90109337.7
- Classe de la CIB
- C12P 21/02
- 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
- Tumor necrosis factor binding protein II, its purification and antibodies thereto
- Nom du demandeur
- YEDA RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD.
- Nom de l'opposant
- ABBOTT GmbH & Co. KG
- Chambre
- 3.3.04
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Court of Human Rights judgements Borgers v. Belgium of 30 October 1991, Kress v. France of 7 June 2001 and Martinie v. France of 12 April 2006, England and Wales Court of Appeal judgement Parker v. The Law Society of 4 December 1998European Patent Convention Art 106(2)European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(b)European Patent Convention Art 54(3)European Patent Convention Art 83 1973Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 19(1)
- Mots-clés
- Presence of assistant at deliberations (yes)
Appealability of interlocutory decision (yes)
Added subject-matter (no)
Sufficiency of disclosure (yes)
Novelty (yes) - Exergue
- 1. The discretion under Article 19(1), second sentence, RPBA may be exercised to allow the board's assistant to attend and to take part in the deliberations (see points 1 to 6).
2. A first interlocutory decision which does not allow a separate appeal can be appealed together with a second interlocutory decision which does not leave any substantive issues outstanding and which allows a separate appeal (see points 7 to 11). - Affaires citantes
- T 1954/14
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decisions under appeal are set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with the order to maintain the patent in amended form on the basis of claims 1 to 33 of the new main request filed with the grounds of appeal of appellant I and a description yet to be adapted.