European Patent Office

T 2486/16 du 12.01.2021

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
ECLI:EP:BA:2021:T248616.20210112
Date de la décision
12 janvier 2021
Numéro de l'affaire
T 2486/16
Requête en révision de
-
Numéro de la demande
08748262.6
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
RECORDING AND REPORTING OF DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS WITH PRIVACY PROTECTION
Nom du demandeur
Appy Risk Technologies Limited
Nom de l'opposant
-
Chambre
3.4.03
Sommaire
-
Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
European Patent Convention Art 122 (2007)European Patent Convention Art 52(1) (2007)European Patent Convention Art 54 (2007)European Patent Convention Art 56 (2007)European Patent Convention R 136 (2007)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(3) (2020)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1) (2020)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(2) (2020)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(1) (2020)
Mots-clés
Novelty - main request (yes)
Inventive step - main request (no)
Inventive step - mixture of technical and non-technical features
Late-filed auxiliary requests - admitted (no)
Exergue
1. In applying Article 13(2) RPBA 2020 the Board may also rely on the criteria set out in Article 13(1) RPBA 2020 ... . The criteria of Article 13(1) RPBA 2020 may therefore supplement, but do not supplant, the separate requirements of Article 13(2) RPBA 2020 (Reasons, point 6.4.1).
2. When filing requests within the period mentioned in Article 13(2) RPBA 2020, the party, in providing its "cogent reasons", should not only identify the circumstances invoked and explain why they are to be regarded as "exceptional", it should also explain why these circumstances had the direct result of preventing the party from filing its requests at an earlier stage. (Reasons, point 6.5.6).
3. The mere fact that, in a communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2020, the Board departs in some respects from the reasoning of the Examining Division on inventive step (while reaching the same conclusion) does not constitute "exceptional circumstances" within the meaning of Article 13(2) RPBA 2020, nor does it open the door to the filing of new requests as a response (Reasons, point 6.6.3).

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is dismissed.