T 0164/83 (Antihistamines) du 17.07.1986
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:1986:T016483.19860717
- Date de la décision
- 17 juilliet 1986
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0164/83
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 80104372.0
- Classe de la CIB
- C07D 473/08
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- -
- Nom du demandeur
- EISAI
- Nom de l'opposant
- -
- Chambre
- 3.3.02
- Sommaire
1. Technical progress shown in comparison with marketed products as an alleged support for inventive step cannot be a substitute for the demonstration of inventive step with regard to the relevant closest state of the art. (Following T 181/82 "Spiro-Compounds/Ciba- Geigy", OJ 9/1984,401).
2. The possibility of a prohibition of experiments with animals in one Contracting State of the EPC is not a sufficient reason for declining the submission of test results in comparison with the closest state of the art if the inventive step can only be demonstrated in this manner.
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 52(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
- Mots-clés
- Inventive step
Quantitative improvement
Technical progress
Comparative tests
Novelty of selection
Experiments with animals - Exergue
- -
- Affaires citées
- -
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that:
1. The impugned decision is set aside.
2. The application is remitted to the Examining Division for further prosecution. The applicant has to submit test results comparing the claimed properties (cf. Claim 7) of the compound described on page 3, lines 19 and 20 of the application with those of Example 38.2 of GB-A-1 889 287 (page 10, lines 24-26) by 31 January 1987. Decision of Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.2 dated 25 September 1986