T 0268/89 (Magnetic plaster) du 06.02.1992
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:1992:T026889.19920206
- Date de la décision
- 6 février 1992
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0268/89
- En ligne le
- 24 mars 1992
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 82100942.0
- Classe de la CIB
- A61N 1/42A61F 13/02
- Langue de la procédure
- Allemand
- Distribution
- Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
- Téléchargement
- -
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- -
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- -
- Nom du demandeur
- Latzke
- Nom de l'opposant
- Pharma Stroschein
- Chambre
- 3.2.02
- Sommaire
Where the inefficacy of a device or process forming part of the prior art is only recognised or alleged after the date of priority or filing, this cannot be cited in formulating the problem. This particularly applies where a problem of the "problem invention" type (cf. T 2/83, "Simethicone Tablet"/RIDER, OJ EPO 1984, 265) is used as an argument to show that an inventive step has taken place. The guiding consideration in assessing inventive step is the knowledge of the skilled person before the date of priority or filing (cf. point 5, paragraph 3, of the Reasons).
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
- Mots-clés
- Formulation of the problem where the inefficacy of a known device is only recognised after the date of filing
Inventive step (yes, after amendment of claims) - Exergue
- -
- Affaires citées
- -
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The contested decision is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with instructions to maintain the European patent in amended form on the basis of the documents referred to in section VIII above.