T 0041/89 () of 21.5.1990

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:1990:T004189.19900521
Date of decision: 21 May 1990
Case number: T 0041/89
Application number: 83302847.5
IPC class: C10M 1/20
Language of proceedings: EN
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 125 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Process for the production of either an alkaline earth metal alkyl phenate or a sulphurised alkaline earth metal alkyl phenate
Applicant name: Orabis Ltd.
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.01
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 109(1)
Keywords: Claim - amendment - appeal


Cited decisions:
T 0047/90
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

1. This is an appeal from a Decision of the Examining Division in which it was held that the claimed subject-matter did not involve an inventive step. Prior to issuing its Decision, the Examining Division had issued two communications under Article 96(2) EPC giving its grounds against the grant of the European patent and inviting amendment of the application. In reply, the Appellants submitted observations and amendments, but these did not overcome the objections of the Examining Division.

2. In the grounds of appeal, the Appellants have not attempted to contest the Decision of the Examining Division refusing the application with text as previously proposed, but have filed an amended statement of claim which is clearly intended to meet the objections to grant which have previously been raised by the Examining Division, and have also filed arguments in support of the allowability of the presently proposed claims. In this circumstance, following the principles set out in Decision T 47/90 dated 20 February 1990, the case is remitted to the Examining Division under Article 111(1) EPC for further examination as to whether the proposed amendments are allowable under Article 123(2) EPC and if so, as to whether the amended text meets the requirements of the EPC.



For these reasons, it is decided that:

The case is remitted to the first instance for further prosecution.

Quick Navigation