T 0803/17 du 21.06.2022
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T080317.20220621
- Date de la décision
- 21 juin 2022
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0803/17
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 06709968.9
- Classe de la CIB
- A61B 19/00
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Non distribuées (D)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- SURGICAL PLANNING
- Nom du demandeur
- KINGS COLLEGE LONDON
Depuy International Limited - Nom de l'opposant
- Calibre Search Ltd.
- Chambre
- 3.2.02
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 106(2)European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention R 99(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(4)
- Mots-clés
- Admissibility of appeal - appeal sufficiently substantiated (yes)
Admissibility of opposition
Appeal decision - extent of examination
Appeal decision - reformatio in peius
Late-filed evidence - submitted shortly before oral proceedings
Late-filed evidence - admitted (no)
Novelty - (yes)
Inventive step - (yes) - Exergue
- The yardstick for determining whether the position of an appellant is, because of its own appeal, worsened in a way which is incompatible with the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in peius is the order of the decision under appeal, in particular the order's legal effect on the appellant.
If an opposition is considered inadmissible in the appeal proceedings, an appellant whose opposition was rejected in the decision under appeal as unallowable would not be in a worse position than if it had not appealed, as in both cases the patent would be maintained as granted. The legal reasons leading to this result, including whether the opposition is rejected as inadmissible or unallowable, do not fall within the scope of the principle of the prohibition of reformatio in peius (Reasons 3.5).
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.