T 0144/09 du 04.05.2011

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence: ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T014409.20110504
Date de la décision: 4 mai 2011
Numéro de l'affaire: T 0144/09
Requête en révision de: -
Numéro de la demande: 99113776.1
Classe de la CIB: B66B 11/00
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: Traction sheave elevator
Nom du demandeur: Kone Corporation
Nom de l'opposant: INVENTIO AG
ORONA E.I.C S. Coop.
Otis Elevator Company
Chambre: 3.2.06
Sommaire: -
Dispositions juridiques pertinentes: European Patent Convention Art 104(1)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 112a European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 113(2)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention R 100(1)European Patent Convention R 106Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 16(1)(e)
Mots-clés: Main request and first, second, fourth and sixth auxiliary requests - not admitted (Art. 12(4) RPBA)
Third auxiliary request - added subject-matter (Art. 123(2) EPC)
Fifth auxiliary request - not admitted (Art. 13(1) RPBA)
Referral of question to Enlarged Board of Appeal - rejected
Objection under Rule 106 EPC - dismissed
Apportionment of costs - requests rejected
Exergue: 1. A request can be held inadmissible under Article 12(4) RPBA when added subject-matter held unallowable during proceedings before the opposition division is not removed at least by way of an auxiliary request filed in those proceedings, but only by way of a request filed during the appeal proceedings (Reasons 1.4).
2. The applicability of Article 12(4) RPBA is not restricted by the time limit for filing the grounds of appeal or any reply thereto (Reasons 1.17).
Affaires citées: G 0001/95 G 0001/05 J 0015/85 T 0910/92 T 0545/01 T 1854/08
Affaires citantes: T 1178/08 T 0848/09 T 0872/09 T 0936/09 T 1062/09 T 2001/09 T 1132/10 T 1499/10 T 1616/10 T 0134/11 T 0273/11 T 0301/11 T 0840/11 T 1400/11 T 2046/11 T 2244/11 T 2315/11 T 2485/11 T 0154/12 T 0247/12 T 1162/12 T 2009/12 T 2598/12 T 0163/13 T 1578/13 T 1906/13 T 0618/14 T 0692/14 T 0796/14 T 1632/14 T 0874/16 T 2486/18 T 2702/19

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The objection of the appellant under Rule 106 EPC is dismissed.

2. The request of the respondent/opponent OII for referral of a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is rejected.

3. The appeal is dismissed.

4. The requests of the opponents for apportionment of costs are rejected.