T 0390/90 (Crystalline paper filler) du 15.12.1992
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:1992:T039090.19921215
- Date de la décision
- 15 décembre 1992
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0390/90
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 81306189.2
- Classe de la CIB
- D21H 5/18
- 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
- Process for preparing and using a crystalline product
- Nom du demandeur
- Gussinyer
- Nom de l'opposant
- Conte Pietro
- Chambre
- 3.3.01
- Sommaire
An intervention under Article 105 EPC during appeal proceedings is not permissible, but is limited to opposition proceedings; interpretation of G 7/91 and G 8/91 (OJ EPO 1993,346, 356), see also T 27/92 (Referral published in OJ EPO 1993 705, pending under Ref. No. G6/93).
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 105 1973European Patent Convention Art 106(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 111(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973European Patent Convention Art 114(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 54(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 54(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention R 66(1) 1973
- Mots-clés
- Admissibility of intervention of an assumed infringer during appeal proceedings
Legal status of Boards of Appeal
Non- equivalence of appeal and opposition proceedings
Boards' freedom not to refer to Enlarged Board: procedural economy
Novelty (yes) - second document incorporated by reference into the primary document - no disclosure of a continuous process in the light of common general knowledge at the relevant publication date
Inventive step (yes) - onus of proof regarding disputed effects - Exergue
- -
- Affaires citées
- -
ORDER
For these reasons, it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.