Information
Cette page n'est disponible qu'en Anglais.
Selected decisions
The list of “Selected decisions” alerts users to all newly published decisions for which a headnote or a catchword has been provided by the board. Usually, a board will add a headnote or catchword if it wishes to provide a brief summary of a particular point of law or to draw attention to an important part of the reasons for the decision. The list contains all decisions with a headnote or catchword published in the last three years and can be viewed by year by selecting the year from the menu on the left.
The list below contains all decisions with a headnote or catchword that have been released for publication in the last six months (newest first).
November 2020
Novelty - (yes)
Inventive step - (yes)
Amendments - allowable (yes)
Late-filed evidence - admitted (no)
Participation in oral proceedings by way of private video connection (no)
Zulässigkeit der Beschwerde - Beschwerdegebühr (nicht vollständig entrichtet)
Zulässigkeit der Beschwerde - Beschwerde gilt als nicht eingelegt
Novelty - (yes)
Inventive step - (yes)
Late-filed documents
Late-filed document - amendments after arrangement of oral proceedings
Late-filed document - justification for late filing (no)
Late-filed document - admitted (no)
i) The board is empowered to and must assess the validity of a priority right claim as required by Article 87(1) EPC,
ii) the board's interpretation of the expression "any person" in Article 87(1) EPC confirms the long-established "all applicants" or the "same applicants" approach,
iii) the national law does not govern who is "any person" as per Article 87(1) EPC, the Paris Convention determines who "any person" is.
Priority - main request (no)
Novelty - main request (no)
Added subject-matter - (yes)
Decision in written proceedings - (yes): cancellation of arranged oral proceedings following announcement of non-attendance
Reimbursement of appeal fee at 100%
Reimbursement of appeal fee - (no): appeal not allowable
Partial reimbursement of appeal fee at 25% - (yes): timely withdrawal of request for oral proceedings; T 0073/17 not followed
If the arguments in the appealed decision show that for the discretionary decision taken in the first instance some criteria weighed so heavily that other criteria cannot outweigh them, it is not always necessary that all criteria that could theoretically influence a discretionary decision concerning the admittance of a late filed request are discussed in the appealed decision (point 2.2.3)
If the need to file amended requests does not arise owing to the submission of additional documents that are merely confirming the arguments on file but had existed before, the filing of such additional documents cannot always justify the filing of new (belated) requests (point 2.3).
Novelty (granted claims)
Novelty - no
Late-filed requests (Auxiliary Requests 1 to 4)
Late-filed request - not admitted
October 2020
Amendments - added subject-matter (no)
Claims - clarity after amendment (yes)
Sufficiency of disclosure - (yes)
Durch die Einreichung eines neuen Hauptantrags ersetzter und implizit zurückgenommener Hauptantrag
Änderungen - zulässig (nein)
Änderungen - Zwischenverallgemeinerung
Spät eingereichter Antrag - vor der Einspruchsabteilung zurückgenommenen Antrag
Zulässigkeit der Beschwerde (ja)
Rechtliches Gehör - Verletzung (nein)
Änderungen - Erweiterung des Patentanspruchs (nein)
Zurückverweisung an die erste Instanz (ja)
September 2020
Claims - clarity (no)
Late-filed auxiliary requests - admitted (no)