European Patent Office

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.

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.