T 0274/95 (Re-introduced ground of opposition) du 02.02.1996
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:1996:T027495.19960202
- Date de la décision
- 2 février 1996
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 0274/95
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 85308677.5
- Classe de la CIB
- G07F 3/02
- 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
- Coin checking apparatus
- Nom du demandeur
- MARS INCORPORATED
- Nom de l'opposant
- WH Münzprüfer Dietmar Trenner GmbH
- Chambre
- 3.4.01
- Sommaire
I. If a ground of opposition is substantiated in the notice of opposition but is subsequently not maintained during the Opposition Division proceedings (here: a statement to that effect is made by the opponent during oral proceedings), the Opposition Division is under no obligation to consider this ground further or to deal with it in its decision, unless the ground is sufficiently relevant to be likely to prejudice maintenance of the patent (following Opinion G 10/91).
II. A ground of opposition which is substantiated in the notice of opposition but which is subsequently not maintained before the Opposition Division, if sought to be re-introduced during appeal proceedings is not a "fresh ground of opposition" within the meaning of Opinion G 10/91, and may consequently be re-introduced into the appeal proceedings without the agreement of the patent proprietor, in the exercise of the Board of Appeal's discretion.
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 100(c) 1973European Patent Convention Art 114(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 123(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973
- Mots-clés
- Ground of opposition (Article 100(c) EPC) substantiated in the notice of opposition but not maintained before the Opposition Division
Re-introduction into appeal proceedings in the discretion of the Board of Appeal
Subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application as filed (no)
Inventive step (yes) - Exergue
- -
- Affaires citées
- G 0010/91
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The request for an apportionment of costs is rejected.