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.
T 2440/16 () of 17.5.2022 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online on20.05.2022 |
Board- |
Decision date17.5.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPC- |
Application no.- |
Catchword
Ablehnung wegen Besorgnis der Befangenheit |
|||||
KeywordsTeilweise Unzulässigkeit des Ablehnungsantrags wegen offensichtlich falscher Auslegung verfahrensrechtlicher Pflichten-jaTeilweise Unzulässigkeit des Ablehnungsantrags wegen Vornahme weiterer Verfahrenshandlungen - ja Tatsächliche Befangenheit - nein Besorgnis der Befangenheit - nein Dienstliche Äußerung nach Artikel 3 (2) VOBK 2020 - notwendiger Inhalt |
Application titlexxx |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T244016.20220517 |
DistributionD |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 486 KB) |
|||
T 2766/17 () of 17.3.2022 | |||||
Online on18.05.2022 |
Board3.2.02 |
Decision date17.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61J 3/07A61K 8/02 B65B 25/06 A61Q 11/00 B65B 11/50 A61K 9/70 |
Application no.03748966.3 |
CatchwordStatements in the description contradicting the plain claim wording may cast doubts as to the intended meaning of this wording. Under such circumstances an objection under Article 84 EPC has to be raised. |
|||||
KeywordsAmendment occasioned by ground for opposition - (yes)Remittal - special reasons for remittal Remittal - (no) Amendments - added subject-matter (no) Novelty - (yes) Inventive step - (yes) Adaptation of the description (yes) |
Application titlePACKAGING AND DISPENSING OF RAPID DISSOLVE DOSAGE FORM |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T276617.20220317 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 339 KB) |
|||
T 1891/20 (Request for correction of the minutes/THALES) of 16.5.2022 | |||||
Online on18.05.2022 |
Board3.5.03 |
Decision date16.5.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH04W 8/18 |
Application no.14824813.1 |
Catchword
If a party considers that the "essentials of the oral proceedings" or "relevant statements" within the meaning of Rule 124(1) EPC are incorrect or missing in the minutes of oral proceedings, they must file a request for correction of the minutes in the shortest time possible after their receipt. This ensures that the relevant facts and submissions are still fresh in the minds of the members of the deciding body and, if applicable, the other party or parties (Reasons 9.2). |
|||||
KeywordsCorrection of the minutes - (no): present minutes include essentials of the oral proceedings and the parties' relevant statements |
Application titleMethod for accessing a service and a corresponding device |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T189120.20220516 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 401 KB) |
|||
T 1370/18 (Entropy coding/FRAUNHOFER GESELSCHAFT) of 2.12.2021 | |||||
Online on16.05.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date2.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH03M 7/30 |
Application no.09776891.5 |
CatchwordAn encoding or compression algorithm contributes to the technical character of the claimed compression method if it is used for the purpose of reducing the amount of data to be stored or transmitted (reasons 7). |
|||||
KeywordsClaims - clarity after amendment (yes)Amendments - added subject-matter (no) Inventive step - (yes) Remittal |
Application titleMethod for encoding a symbol, method for decoding a symbol, method for transmitting a symbol from a transmitter to a receiver, encoder, decoder and system for transmitting a symbol from a transmitter to a receiver |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T137018.20211202 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 339 KB) |
|||
T 0339/19 (Film for stand-up-pouches/DOW) of 29.3.2022 | |||||
Online on16.05.2022 |
Board3.3.06 |
Decision date29.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCB32B 27/32B65D 75/00 |
Application no.14166395.5 |
Catchword"Exceptional circumstances" in Rule 13(2) RPBA interpreted as those that compromise neither the procedural rights of the other party, nor procedural economy. |
|||||
KeywordsAmendment after summons - exercise of discretionAmendment after summons - taken into account (yes) Inventive step - main request (yes) Amendment to appeal case - amendment detrimental to procedural economy (no) Amendment to appeal case - amendment overcomes issues raised (yes) General principles |
Application titleSingle polymer film structures for use in stand-up-pouches |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T033919.20220329 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 397 KB) |
|||
T 1791/19 () of 16.3.2022 | |||||
Online on13.05.2022 |
Board3.2.04 |
Decision date16.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCF04D 29/22F04D 7/04 F04D 29/42 |
Application no.12705877.4 |
CatchwordReasons 7 |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - (no)Amendments - allowable (no) Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no) Appeal decision - remittal to the department of first instance (no) |
Application titleFREE-FLOW PUMP |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T179119.20220316 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 418 KB) |
|||
T 2622/19 (Deep-in-the-canal hearing device/INSOUND) of 7.4.2022 | |||||
Online on11.05.2022 |
Board3.5.03 |
Decision date7.4.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH04R 25/00 |
Application no.12795674.6 |
Catchword
As to the application of the problem-solution approach, in particular the determination of the objective technical problem and the choice of the "second document", see |
|||||
KeywordsSufficiency of disclosure - (yes)Added subject-matter - (no) Novelty - (yes) Inventive step - (yes): problem-solution approach with partial problems Inventive step - ex post facto analysis |
Application titleCIC hearing device |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T262219.20220407 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 500 KB) |
|||
T 0727/19 () of 1.4.2022 | |||||
Online on10.05.2022 |
Board3.2.04 |
Decision date1.4.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA47J 31/44A47J 31/46 |
Application no.11772975.6 |
Catchword
1. The Guidelines, Part E, Chapter XI, set out the procedure whereby the reasons of a responsible superior's decision rejecting a challenge to the impartiality of a division can be appealed. This procedure does not make the responsible superior's decision formally appealable (Reasons 2.3 and 2.4) |
|||||
KeywordsJustified suspicion of partiality (yes)Substantial procedural violation - (yes) Remittal - fundamental deficiency in first-instance proceedings (yes) Remittal - re-examination of the case ab initio New composition of the first-instance department ordered Prohibition of reformatio in peius (no) Reimbursement of appeal fee - (yes) |
Application titleBEVERAGE MACHINE FOR DIFFERENT SPATIAL ENVIRONMENTS |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T072719.20220401 |
DistributionB |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 446 KB) |
|||
T 0318/14 (Doppelpatentierung) of 7.2.2019 | |||||
Online on06.05.2022 |
Board3.3.01 |
Decision date7.2.2019 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 35/74A23L 1/30 A61P 37/08 A61P 1/12 |
Application no.10718590.2 |
Catchword
Der Großen Beschwerdekammer werden folgende Rechtsfragen vorgelegt: |
|||||
KeywordsVorlage an die Große Beschwerdekammer - (bejaht) |
Application title- |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2019:T031814.20190207 |
DistributionA |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 259 KB) |
|||
T 0318/14 (Double patenting) of 7.2.2019 | |||||
Online on06.05.2022 |
Board3.3.01 |
Decision date7.2.2019 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 35/74A23L 1/30 A61P 37/08 A61P 1/12 |
Application no.10718590.2 |
Catchword
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal: |
|||||
KeywordsReferral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (yes) |
Application titlePREVENTION AND TREATMENT OF ALLERGIC DIARRHOEA |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2019:T031814.20190207 |
DistributionA |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 908 KB) |
|||
T 0318/14 (Double protection par brevet) of 7.2.2019 | |||||
Online on06.05.2022 |
Board3.3.01 |
Decision date7.2.2019 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 35/74A23L 1/30 A61P 37/08 A61P 1/12 |
Application no.10718590.2 |
Catchword
Les questions suivantes sont soumises à la Grande Chambre de recours : |
|||||
KeywordsSaisine de la Grande Chambre de recours - (oui) |
Application title- |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2019:T031814.20190207 |
DistributionA |
DecisionTexte de la décision en FR (PDF, 308 KB) |
|||
T 2293/18 () of 31.3.2022 | |||||
Online on04.05.2022 |
Board3.5.02 |
Decision date31.3.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCH01R 9/24B41J 1/00 |
Application no.11763583.9 |
CatchwordStützung der Ansprüche durch die Beschreibung, s. Punkt 3.3.5 |
|||||
KeywordsZulässigkeit der Beschwerde - BeschwerdeschriftZulässigkeit der Beschwerde - Antrag in dem Beschwerdegegenstand festgelegt wird (ja) Spät eingereichte Tatsachen - Hauptantrag hätte bereits im erstinstanzlichen Verfahren vorgebracht werden können (ja) Hilfsantrag 1 - Klarheit (ja) - Stützung der Ansprüche durch die Beschreibung (nein) Hilfsantrag 2 - Erweiterung über den Inhalt der Anmeldung in der eingereichten Fassung hinaus (nein) Hilfsantrag 2 - Stützung der Ansprüche durch die Beschreibung und Klarheit (ja) Hilfsantrag 2 - Neuheit (ja) Hilfsantrag 2 - Erfinderische Tätigkeit - nicht naheliegende Lösung |
Application titleKennzeichnungsmatte zur Kennzeichnung elektrischer Bauelemente und Verfahren zur Herstellung einer solchen Kennzeichnungsmatte |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T229318.20220331 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 566 KB) |
|||
T 1362/19 (Implicit disclosure of abstract concepts / Wai-Lin) of 31.3.2022 | |||||
Online on04.05.2022 |
Board3.4.03 |
Decision date31.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG09G 5/00H03M 11/00 |
Application no.05782186.0 |
CatchwordIf an abstract feature is not defined in more concrete terms either in the relevant claim or in the description of the application, it has to be understood in a broad sense. This may be important when assessing the implicit disclosure of a document of the state of the art. In particular, for this assessment it may be irrelevant whether there are several alternatives for implementing the abstract feature in concrete terms (Reasons 2.3.7). |
|||||
KeywordsNovelty - main request (no)Novelty - auxiliary request (no) Novelty - implicit disclosure (yes) |
Application titleVIRTUAL KEYPAD INPUT DEVICE |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T136219.20220331 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 372 KB) |
G 0004/19 (Doppelpatentierung) of 22.6.2021 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online on29.04.2022 |
BoardEBA |
Decision date22.6.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 35/74A23L 1/30 A61P 37/08 A61P 1/12 |
Application no.10718590.2 |
Headnote
1. Eine europäische Patentanmeldung kann nach den Artikeln 97 (2) und 125 EPÜ zurückgewiesen werden, wenn sie denselben Gegenstand beansprucht wie ein demselben Anmelder erteiltes europäisches Patent, das nicht zum Stand der Technik nach Artikel 54 (2) und (3) EPÜ gehört. |
|||||
KeywordsZulässigkeit der Vorlagen (bejaht)Auslegung des Artikels 125 EPÜ Keine Verfahrensvorschrift im Übereinkommen Ergänzende Auslegungsmittel nach dem Wiener Übereinkommen über das Recht der Verträge Rechtsgrundlage für eine Zurückweisung nach Artikel 97 (2) EPÜ wegen Doppelpatentierung |
Application title- |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:G000419.20210622 |
DistributionA |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 184 KB) |
|||
G 0004/19 (Double protection par brevet) of 22.6.2021 | |||||
Online on29.04.2022 |
BoardEBA |
Decision date22.6.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 35/74A23L 1/30 A61P 37/08 A61P 1/12 |
Application no.10718590.2 |
Headnote
1. Une demande de brevet européen peut être rejetée au titre des articles 97(2) et 125 CBE si elle revendique le même objet qu'un brevet européen qui a été délivré au même demandeur et n'est pas compris dans l'état de la technique au sens de l'article 54(2) et (3) CBE. |
|||||
KeywordsInterprétation de l'article 125 CBEAbsence d'une disposition de procédure dans la Convention Moyens complémentaires d'interprétation en vertu de la Convention de Vienne sur le droit des traités Base juridique d'un rejet au titre de l'article 97(2) CBE pour cause de double protection par brevet |
Application title- |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:G000419.20210622 |
DistributionA |
DecisionTexte de la décision en FR (PDF, 207 KB) |
|||
T 0250/19 () of 17.2.2022 | |||||
Online on28.04.2022 |
Board3.2.02 |
Decision date17.2.2022 |
Proc. languageFR |
IPCA61B 17/16 |
Application no.11188050.6 |
Catchword
L'impossibilité d'utiliser un tableau blanc ou un « flip chart » physiques lors d'une procédure orale tenue par visioconférence ne viole pas le droit d'une partie d'être entendue selon l'article 113 CBE (point 9.5.8 des motifs). |
|||||
KeywordsActivité inventive - (oui)Modifications - extension de la protection (non) Faits produits tardivement - requête aurait pu être produite en première instance (oui) Objection soumise tardivement - recevable (non) Preuves produites tardivement - requête aurait pu être produite en première instance (oui) Droit d'être entendu - procédure orale sous forme de visioconférence |
Application titleFraiseuse orthopédique de préparation osseuse, en particulier de préparation glénoïdienne |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T025019.20220217 |
DistributionC |
DecisionTexte de la décision en FR (PDF, 720 KB) |
|||
T 2201/19 (BEDIENSYSTEM BEI EINEM SCHIENENFAHRZEUG / Siemens Mobility) of 2.3.2022 | |||||
Online on26.04.2022 |
Board3.5.05 |
Decision date2.3.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCB61L 15/00 |
Application no.13771411.9 |
Catchword
Ein nach der Ladung zur mündlichen Verhandlung eingereichter neuer Hilfsantrag, der nur noch einen bereits im von der Einspruchsabteilung aufrechterhaltenen Hauptantrag enthaltenen unabhängigen Verfahrensanspruch enthält, während alle anderen vorrangigen (Produkt-)Ansprüche gestrichen wurden, kann dann nicht als grundsätzlich unberücksichtigt bleibende Änderung des Beschwerdevorbringens im Sinne des Artikels 13(2) VOBK 2020 angesehen werden, wenn das bisherige Vorbringen der Beteiligten bereits eine hinreichende Grundlage zur Entscheidung über den neuen Hilfsantrag bietet (abweichend von T |
|||||
KeywordsÄnderung veranlasst durch Einspruchsgrund - HauptantragÄnderung veranlasst durch Einspruchsgrund - (nein) Spät eingereichte Hilfsanträge - Wechsel des Gegenstandes Spät eingereichte Hilfsanträge - Hilfsanträge 1-3 Spät eingereichte Hilfsanträge - (ja) Spät eingereichte Hilfsanträge - Wechsel des Gegenstandes Spät eingereichte Hilfsanträge - Hilfsantrag 4 (nein) |
Application titleBEDIENSYSTEM ZUR BEDIENUNG VON FUNKTIONSEINHEITEN BEI EINEM SCHIENENFAHRZEUG |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T220119.20220302 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 387 KB) |
|||
J 0014/21 () of 13.4.2022 | |||||
Online on20.04.2022 |
Board3.1.01 |
Decision date13.4.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61M 21/00A61B 5/00 G06F 3/01 |
Application no.19749424.8 |
Catchword
The PCT Assembly may be considered the legislator for the PCT Regulations. See reasons 16. |
|||||
KeywordsInternational (PCT) application - restoration of the right of priority - admissibilityRequest for further processing Failure to observe time limits for restoration of the right of priority and for entering in the European phase "Understandings relating to certain provisions" adopted by PCT Assembly as legislator Authentic interpretation of PCT Rules by PCT Assembly Time limit ending on Easter Monday Primary object of appeal proceedings to review decision "Eventualmaxime" Factual basis of impugned decision on restoration of the right of priority may not be changed in appeal proceedings Re-establishment of rights - (no) Re-establishment of rights - all due care (no) Re-establishment of rights - due care on the part of the professional representative Professional representative's failure to clarify client's instructions No substitution during absence of professional representative |
Application titleMETHOD OF DEVELOPMENT OF CONCENTRATIONS AND DEVICE PRK-1U FOR ITS IMPLEMENTATION |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:J001421.20220413 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 636 KB) |
|||
T 1474/19 (Payment by debit order/SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC) of 6.4.2022 | |||||
Online on12.04.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date6.4.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06F 17/30 |
Application no.11771337.0 |
Catchword
I. A debit order has to be interpreted on its substance, according to the (objectively) clear intention of the appellant expressed therein to pay a fee in the applicable amount. |
|||||
KeywordsAppeal fee (paid) - appeal deemed to have been filed |
Application titleMETHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR PROVIDING ACCESS TO DATA AND MEASUREMENTS IN A MANAGEMENT SYSTEM |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T147419.20220406 |
DistributionB |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 737 KB) |
|||
T 0489/14 (Pedestrian simulation/BENTLEY SYSTEMS) of 26.11.2021 | |||||
Online on08.04.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date26.11.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06F 17/50 |
Application no.03793825.5 |
Catchword
Application of decision G 1/19 to |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - main request, first to fifth, seventh and eighth auxiliary requests (no)Late-filed request - ninth, tenth and eleventh auxiliary requests (not admitted) |
Application titleSimulation of the movement of an autonomous entity through an environment |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T048914.20211126 |
DistributionB |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 457 KB) |
|||
T 0960/15 (Radiotherapeutic treatment plan adaptation / Philips) of 22.12.2021 | |||||
Online on06.04.2022 |
Board3.4.01 |
Decision date22.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61N 5/00G06K 9/00 |
Application no.05779771.4 |
CatchwordThe Boards of Appeal may review discretionary decisions. There are, however, limits on the extent of review that reflect the discretion accorded to the deciding body. In the present case, the Opposition Division decided to consider document D8 and the review of this decision is a primary object of the appeal proceedings (Article 12(2) RPBA 2020) - see Reasons 1 - 9. |
|||||
KeywordsPositive discretionary decision - legal basis for review (yes)Positive discretionary decision - set aside (no) Inventive step (main request, auxiliary requests I, IV') Inventive step - (no); (auxiliary request II') Inventive step - effect not made credible within the whole scope of claim Claims - clarity Claims - (auxiliary requests I, I', II, II', III, III', IV) (no) Amendment to appeal case (auxiliary requests I',I'', II'', II''', III'') Amendment to appeal case - suitability of amendment to resolve issues raised (no) |
Application titleRADIOTHERAPEUTIC TREATMENT PLAN ADAPTATION |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T096015.20211222 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 467 KB) |
|||
T 2361/18 (Objective function/GLOBAL NUCLEAR FUEL-AMERICAS) of 31.3.2022 | |||||
Online on06.04.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date31.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06F 17/50 |
Application no.03255772.0 |
CatchwordIf a request for oral proceedings is withdrawn after a date for oral proceedings has been set but before the notification of a communication issued in preparation for the oral proceedings, the withdrawal occurs "within one month of notification" for the purpose of Rule 103(4)(c) EPC. |
|||||
KeywordsAmendments - extension beyond the content of the application as filed (yes)Reimbursement of appeal fee (yes) |
Application titleMethod and apparatus for adaptively determining weight factors within the context of an objective function |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T236118.20220331 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 307 KB) |
|||
T 1869/18 () of 31.3.2022 | |||||
Online on05.04.2022 |
Board3.4.03 |
Decision date31.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH01L 21/04H01L 29/16 H01L 29/45 |
Application no.05803665.8 |
CatchwordWhile objections raised by the Board for the first time in a communication under Article 15(1) RPBA 2020 may be considered to give rise to exceptional circumstances within the meaning of Article 13(2) RPBA 2020, and may possibly justify the filing of amendments which specifically respond to the new objections, this does not open the door to additional amendments which are unrelated to the new objections, and for which no exceptional circumstances exist (Reasons, point 3.10). |
|||||
KeywordsMain request - amendment after summons - admitted into the proceedings (no)Right to be heard - opportunity to comment (yes) Claims - clarity Claims - auxiliary requests (no) |
Application titleMETHOD OF PRODUCING SILICON-RICH NICKEL-SILICIDE OHMIC CONTACTS FOR SIC SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T186918.20220331 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 392 KB) |
|||
T 2843/19 () of 9.2.2022 | |||||
Online on05.04.2022 |
Board3.2.01 |
Decision date9.2.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCB60G 17/052B60G 17/015 |
Application no.10767937.5 |
Catchword
Zur Notwendigkeit einer rechtzeitigen Replik: |
|||||
KeywordsErfinderische Tätigkeit - Hauptantrag (ja)Neuer Einspruchsgrund Neuheit - zugelassen (nein) Neuer Einwand nach Ladung - außergewöhnliche Umstände (nein) |
Application titleVENTILEINRICHTUNG FÜR EINE LUFTFEDERUNGSANLAGE |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T284319.20220209 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 445 KB) |
|||
T 0689/20 () of 22.3.2022 | |||||
Online on05.04.2022 |
Board3.2.04 |
Decision date22.3.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCA47L 15/42A47L 15/44 |
Application no.06819808.4 |
CatchwordGründe 3 |
|||||
KeywordsWesentlicher Verfahrensmangel - angefochtene Entscheidung ausreichend begründet (nein)Wesentlicher Verfahrensmangel - Verletzung des rechtlichen Gehörs (ja) Zurückverweisung - (ja) Rückzahlung der Beschwerdegebühr - (ja) |
Application titleGESCHIRRSPÜLMASCHINE MIT VERBESSERTER ANORDNUNG DER ZUGABEEINRICHTUNG IN DER TÜR |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T068920.20220322 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 305 KB) |
|||
T 1117/19 (Lückenfüller bei TV-Live-Ereignissen/NOVOMATIC) of 18.3.2022 | |||||
Online on01.04.2022 |
Board3.5.03 |
Decision date18.3.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCH04H 20/18H04H 20/42 |
Application no.10726906.0 |
CatchwordDie Verbesserung der Nutzerzufriedenheit z. B. bei einer TV-Live-Übertragung ist im Allgemeinen eine nicht-technische, administrative Aufgabe, für die üblicherweise ein TV-Stationsmanager als Fachperson zuständig ist (siehe Gründe 5.6 der Entscheidung). |
|||||
KeywordsNeuheit - Hauptantrag, Hilfsanträge I, Ia (nein)Erfinderische Tätigkeit - Hilfsanträge II, IIa, IIb, III, II', IIa', IIb, III (nein) |
Application titleVerfahren und Vorrichtung zur Übertragung von Ereignisdaten wobei zumindest ein Teil der Daten über zumindest einen Übertragungskanal höherer Bandbreite und zumindest ein Teil der Daten über zumindest einen Übertragungskanal niedrigerer Bandbreite übertragen werden |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T111719.20220318 |
DistributionD |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 439 KB) |
T 1024/18 () of 1.3.2022 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online on29.03.2022 |
Board3.2.06 |
Decision date1.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61F 13/15 |
Application no.12183745.4 |
CatchwordNecessity to adapt the description (Reasons 3) |
|||||
KeywordsNovelty - public prior useNovelty - obligation to maintain secrecy (no) Amendments - auxiliary requests 1 and 3 Amendments - added subject-matter (yes) Claims - support in the description (no) |
Application titleApparatus and method for forming absorbent cores |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T102418.20220301 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 650 KB) |
|||
T 2660/18 (Developing rod patterns in nuclear reactors/GLOBAL NUCLEAR FUEL- … of 7.12.2021 | |||||
Online on29.03.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date7.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06F 17/50G21C 5/02 |
Application no.03257922.9 |
Catchword
In case T 625/11, the board concluded that the determination, as a limit value, of the value of a first operating parameter conferred a technical character to the claim which went beyond the mere interaction between the numerical simulation algorithm and the computer system. The nature of the parameter thus identified was, in fact, "intimately linked to" the operation of a nuclear reactor, independently of whether the parameter was actually used in a nuclear reactor (T 625/11, Reasons 8.4). |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - main, first and second auxiliary requests (no) |
Application titleMethod and arrangement for developing rod patterns in nuclear reactors |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T266018.20211207 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 433 KB) |
|||
T 1641/18 (Verbundscheibe/SCHOTT) of 31.1.2022 | |||||
Online on18.03.2022 |
Board3.3.06 |
Decision date31.1.2022 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCB32B 17/10E04B 1/94 C03C 27/12 |
Application no.11179998.7 |
CatchwordWährend eine Fachperson im Allgemeinen Dokumente nicht kombinieren würde, wenn dies zu einem Verzicht auf eine wesentliche Funktion der Erfindung im nächstliegenden Stand der Technik führen würde, gilt dies in der Regel nicht für Kombinationen, bei denen ein wesentliches Merkmal durch ein dieselbe Funktion erfüllendes alternatives Merkmal ersetzt wird (Punkte 1.3.2 und 1.3.3 der Gründe). |
|||||
KeywordsErfinderische Tätigkeit - naheliegende Kombination bekannter Merkmale |
Application titleVerbundscheibe |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T164118.20220131 |
DistributionD |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 420 KB) |
|||
T 2120/18 () of 2.2.2022 | |||||
Online on18.03.2022 |
Board3.4.03 |
Decision date2.2.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH05K 3/24H01L 23/488 |
Application no.10175344.0 |
Catchword
1. An opposition division's rejection of a request for extension of the time limit indicated in its communication under Rule 79(1) EPC does not terminate the opposition proceedings. Therefore, a patent proprietor is in a position to respond to the notice of opposition beyond the expired time limit or, at least, request the rejection of the opposition as well as oral proceedings. The patent proprietor must anticipate that an opposition division may issue its decision after expiration of the time limit (see Reasons 4.5, 4.6 and 4.9). |
|||||
KeywordsSubstantial procedural violation - (no)Remittal to the opposition division for further prosecution Remittal - (no) Novelty - claim 1 as granted Novelty - (no) Auxiliary request could and should have been filed during the opposition proceedings - admitted (no) |
Application titleTerminal structure, printed wiring board, module substrate, and electronic device |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T212018.20220202 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 441 KB) |
|||
T 0550/14 (Catastrophe relief/SWISS RE) of 14.9.2021 | |||||
Online on16.03.2022 |
Board3.5.01 |
Decision date14.9.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06Q 40/00 |
Application no.09710436.8 |
Catchword
The appellant's wish for the Board to define criteria that the examining division should use to prove that a feature is not technical is tantamount to defining the term technical, which the Boards have consistently declined to do. However, as stated in e.g. T 2314/16 - Distributing rewards/RAKUTEN at points 2.6 to 2.8, over the years the case law has provided guidance on the issue of technicality. Recently, the Board has tended to use the framework for discussion given in the CardinalCommerce decision (T 1463/11 - Universal merchant platform/CardinalCommerce) to help classify whether borderline features of a claim are on the technical or the non-technical side. |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - parametric triggering of payments (noInventive step - not technical) |
Application titleCOMPUTER SYSTEM AND COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHOD FOR MANAGING FUNDING OF CATASTROPHE RELIEF EFFORTS |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T055014.20210914 |
DistributionB |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 381 KB) |
|||
T 0288/19 (notional business person) of 17.2.2022 | |||||
Online on16.03.2022 |
Board3.4.03 |
Decision date17.2.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06Q 40/08G08G 5/00 |
Application no.12735847.1 |
CatchwordThe business person sets the framework of the problem to be solved by their business model (insurance conditions) and thus reduces - by setting specific boundary conditions - the degrees of freedom of the skilled computer specialist. The technically skilled person, who has to solve the objective technical problem of implementation, therefore has no latitude in selecting the corresponding (physical) parameters (reasons 3.6.10). |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - mixture of technical and non-technical featuresInventive step - skilled person Inventive step - reformulation of the technical problem Inventive step - main request (no) Inventive step - auxiliary request (no) |
Application titleAVIONIC SYSTEM FOR EMERGENCY INTERCEPTION IN CASE OF IMMINENT DAMAGES OF AIRCRAFT FLEETS FOLLOWING NATURAL DISASTER EVENTS |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T028819.20220217 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 504 KB) |
|||
T 1234/17 (Customization based on physiological data/ADIDAS AG) of 4.3.2022 | |||||
Online on15.03.2022 |
Board3.5.01 |
Decision date4.3.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06Q 30/06G06F 3/01 A63B 24/00 |
Application no.12196928.1 |
Catchword
However, the question is whether the mere idea of mapping this acceleration data to gait category is technical, involving any technical considerations or having any overall technical effect. This question arises in many inventions that involve mappings and algorithms. |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - customisation of footwear are based on human gait (noInventive step - no technical features) Inventive step - mapping acceleration data to human gait (no Inventive step - not technical) |
Application titleCustomization based on physiological data |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T123417.20220304 |
DistributionB |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 358 KB) |
|||
T 2632/18 (ON/OFF triggering event/SMAPPEE) of 15.2.2022 | |||||
Online on15.03.2022 |
Board3.5.03 |
Decision date15.2.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH04Q 9/00H02J 13/00 |
Application no.14733605.1 |
Catchword
That a "new" objection was raised by a board in appeal proceedings |
|||||
KeywordsInventive step - main request and 1st auxiliary request (no): obvious selection from equally likely alternativesAdmittance of claim request filed after summons - 2nd auxiliary request (no): no exceptional circumstances |
Application titleEnergy management system |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T263218.20220215 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 436 KB) |
|||
T 0184/19 () of 13.12.2021 | |||||
Online on11.03.2022 |
Board3.2.04 |
Decision date13.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCF03D 7/04 |
Application no.11716807.0 |
CatchwordReasons 6.2 to 6.4 |
|||||
KeywordsAdmissibility of appeal - appeal sufficiently substantiated (yes)Novelty - main request (no) Inventive step - auxiliary requests (no) Claims - clarity Claims - auxiliary request (no) Amendments - intermediate generalisation Appeal decision - remittal to the department of first instance (no) Prohibition of reformatio in peius - not applicable |
Application titleA WIND TURBINE |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T018419.20211213 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 1 MB) |
|||
T 2125/18 () of 18.1.2022 | |||||
Online on09.03.2022 |
Board3.2.06 |
Decision date18.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCD06F 37/22 |
Application no.11003983.1 |
Catchword
Notification of the statement of grounds of appeal is not a Rule 100(2) EPC communication (Reasons 1.4) |
|||||
KeywordsAmendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (no) |
Application titleDrum type washing machine |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T212518.20220118 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 707 KB) |
|||
T 2626/17 () of 19.1.2022 | |||||
Online on08.03.2022 |
Board3.5.02 |
Decision date19.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCH01B 3/56H02B 13/055 |
Application no.09783565.6 |
CatchwordThe identification of potential problems of an idea in a prior art document does not necessarily prejudice the public availability of this idea. |
|||||
KeywordsNovelty - (no)Novelty - inherent features Inventive step - (no) Inventive step - choice of the less ambitious of two known alternatives Amendment after summons - taken into account (no) Amendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (no) |
Application titleEncapsulated Switchgear |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T262617.20220119 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 436 KB) |
|||
T 0750/18 () of 20.12.2021 | |||||
Online on07.03.2022 |
Board3.3.02 |
Decision date20.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCC07D 489/12 |
Application no.09789380.4 |
CatchwordThe requirement under Article 12(2) RPBA 2007 to present a complete case does not imply that an appellant/opponent, impugning a decision to maintain a patent in granted or amended form, has to raise objections against all dependent claims (point 4.2 of the reasons). |
|||||
KeywordsCorrection of error - (no)Amendments - added subject-matter (yes) Statement of grounds of appeal - complete case (yes) Statement of grounds of appeal - No need to raise objections against all dependent claims Late-filed test results - admitted (no) Inventive step - auxiliary request 5 (no) Reply to grounds of appeal - complete case (no) - auxiliary request not substantiated Amendment of the case after summons - exceptional circumstances (no) - auxiliary request 6 admitted (no) |
Application titlePROCESSES FOR THE ALKYLATION OF NORBUPRENORPHINE WITH REDUCED IMPURITY FORMATION |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T075018.20211220 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 722 KB) |
T 0582/18 () of 30.11.2021 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online on28.02.2022 |
Board3.2.05 |
Decision date30.11.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCF16P 3/14G01S 17/02 G05B 19/18 |
Application no.13175585.2 |
CatchwordPublic availability of a master's thesis, see point 3.1 of the reasons. |
|||||
KeywordsLate-filed evidence - admitted (yes)Novelty - document made availabe to the public (yes) Novelty - main request (no) Prohibition of reformatio in peius - auxiliary request 1 (yes) |
Application titleMonitoring system and method |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T058218.20211130 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 610 KB) |
|||
T 1265/17 (Nanocellulose/Kemira Oyj) of 16.12.2021 | |||||
Online on14.02.2022 |
Board3.3.06 |
Decision date16.12.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCD21H 21/10 |
Application no.09174967.1 |
CatchwordIf a claim is unduly broadened with respect to the scope of the examples used to illustrate a technical effect, particularly when this broadening concerns the feature/s allegedly providing that effect, the burden of proof might shift back to the proprietor to prove that the effect observed in the examples would also be obtained throughout the entire scope of the claims. If no evidence is provided in this respect, a conclusion may have to be drawn on the basis of plausibility arguments (reasons 2.2.5-2.2.7). |
|||||
KeywordsNew explanation not regarded as an amended caseSufficiency of disclosure - (yes) Inventive step - reformulation of the technical problem Inventive step - main request (no) Inventive step - auxiliary request (yes) |
Application titleProcess for production of paper |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T126517.20211216 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 453 KB) |
|||
T 0084/18 (Testing a distributed processing structure/TELECOM ITALIA) of 7.2.2022 | |||||
Online on11.02.2022 |
Board3.5.07 |
Decision date7.2.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCG06F 11/34 |
Application no.05792039.9 |
CatchwordCase Law of the Boards of Appeal, 9th edition, 2019, III.C.4.3.2 |
|||||
KeywordsNovelty - Main request (no)Inventive step - First auxiliary request (no) Late-filed request - second and third auxiliary requests not admitted in first instance proceedings Late-filed request - not admissible |
Application titleA METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR AUTOMATICALLY TESTING PERFORMANCE OF APPLICATIONS RUN IN A DISTRIBUTED PROCESSING STRUCTURE AND CORRESPONDING COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T008418.20220207 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 466 KB) |
|||
T 1842/18 () of 10.12.2021 | |||||
Online on11.02.2022 |
Board3.2.04 |
Decision date10.12.2021 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCF04D 13/06H02K 5/22 H02K 11/33 |
Application no.11195807.0 |
CatchwordEntscheidungsgründe 4 |
|||||
KeywordsErfinderische Tätigkeit - (nein)Erfinderische Tätigkeit - naheliegende Alternative Erfinderische Tätigkeit - Hauptantrag (nein) Erfinderische Tätigkeit - Hilfsantrag (nein) Spät eingereichter Antrag - divergierende Anspruchsfassungen Spät eingereichter Antrag - eingereicht in der mündlichen Verhandlung Spät eingereichter Antrag - zugelassen (nein) |
Application titlePumpenaggregat |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T184218.20211210 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 403 KB) |
|||
T 0077/18 (Dental composite / KERR CORPORATION) of 21.1.2022 | |||||
Online on07.02.2022 |
Board3.3.07 |
Decision date21.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 6/00A61K 6/083 |
Application no.03254200.3 |
CatchwordThe respondent's requests regarding the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC confront the Board with the issue of admittance of a new ground for opposition which was raised during the oral proceedings before the opposition division but had deliberately not been decided upon by the opposition division. In the absence of a positive decision on admittance by the opposition division, the Board considers that the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) EPC should be treated as a fresh ground at the appeal stage and its admittance should be governed by the principles set forth in G 10/91, which require the proprietor's consent for its introduction in the appeal proceedings. In view of the appellant's refusal thereto, the ground for opposition under Article 100 c) is not to be introduced in the appeal proceedings. |
|||||
KeywordsNovelty - implicit disclosure (no)Inventive step - (yes) Grounds for opposition - late-filed ground for opposition |
Application titlePrepolymerized filler in dental restorative composite |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T007718.20220121 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 385 KB) |
|||
T 1513/17 (Prolongation of survival of an allograft/ALEXION) of 28.1.2022 | |||||
Online on01.02.2022 |
Board3.3.04 |
Decision date28.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCC07K 16/18 |
Application no.05779924.9 (consolidated with Case Number: T 2719/19 - 3.3.04) |
Catchword
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal: |
|||||
KeywordsPriorityCorrection of error Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal |
Application titleProlongation of survival of an allograft by inhibiting complement activity |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T151317.20220128 |
DistributionA |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 456 KB) |
|||
T 2719/19 (Prolongation of survival of an allograft/ALEXION) of 28.1.2022 | |||||
Online on01.02.2022 |
Board3.3.04 |
Decision date28.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA61K 39/395C07K 16/18 |
Application no.16160321.2 (consolidated with Case Number:T 1513/17 - 3.3.04) |
Catchword
The following questions are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal: |
|||||
KeywordsPriorityCorrection of error Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal |
Application titleProlongation of survival of an allograft by inhibiting complement activity |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T271919.20220128 |
DistributionA |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 385 KB) |
T 0988/17 () of 26.11.2021 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Online on17.01.2022 |
Board3.2.02 |
Decision date26.11.2021 |
Proc. languageDE |
IPCA61M 5/32 |
Application no.04018070.5 |
CatchwordWeder Artikel 13(2) VOBK 2020 noch die erläuternden Bemerkungen dazu in CA/3/19 enthalten eine Erklärung, wie allgemein zu bestimmen ist, ob die Umstände "außergewöhnlich" sind. Die Erläuterungen der VOBK 2020 nennen als Beispiel für solche "außergewöhnlichen" Umstände allerdings den Fall, dass die Kammer einen Einwand erstmals in einer Mitteilung erhoben hat. In diesem Fall rechtfertige die veränderte Grundlage des Beschwerdeverfahrens ein verändertes Vorbringen. Die Frage, ob umgekehrt durch geändertes Vorbringen auch die Grundlage des Beschwerdeverfahrens verändert wird, stellt somit ein mögliches Kriterium dar, das für die Beurteilung der Außergewöhnlichkeit der Umstände heranzuziehen ist (Punkt 6.3 der Entscheidungsgründe). |
|||||
KeywordsAusreichende Offenbarung - (ja)Änderungen - Erweiterung über den Inhalt der Anmeldung in der eingereichten Fassung hinaus (nein) Neuheit - (ja) Erfinderische Tätigkeit - (ja) Spät vorgebrachte Argumente - zugelassen (ja) Spät eingereichte Beweismittel - Umstände der Beschwerdesache rechtfertigen Zulassung (nein) Angefochtene Entscheidung - ausreichend begründet (nein) Wesentlicher Verfahrensmangel - Rückzahlung der Beschwerdegebühr (ja) |
Application titleNadelschutz für eine Glasspritze |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T098817.20211126 |
DistributionC |
DecisionText der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 742 KB) |
|||
T 2759/17 () of 7.10.2021 | |||||
Online on17.01.2022 |
Board3.3.02 |
Decision date7.10.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCA01N 63/00A01P 15/00 A01N 31/02 |
Application no.07742566.8 |
CatchwordA disclosure within a prior art document can only be considered to represent a suitable starting point for assessing inventive step if the skilled person would have realistically started from it. An important consideration in this assessment generally is whether this disclosure aims at the same or a similar purpose or effect as that underlying the patent in question (see in particular 5.3 to 5.6 of the Reasons). |
|||||
KeywordsSufficiency of disclosureNovelty Inventive step |
Application titleCOMPOSITION OF BIOFILM CONTROL AGENT |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T275917.20211007 |
DistributionC |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 459 KB) |
|||
T 2073/18 () of 10.1.2022 | |||||
Online on13.01.2022 |
Board3.2.07 |
Decision date10.1.2022 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCB65D 83/10 |
Application no.07799574.4 |
CatchwordSpecial reasons present in the sense of Article 11 (1) RPBA 2020 (see point 6 of the reasons for the decision) |
|||||
KeywordsDecision in written proceedings without oral proceedings - (yes)Novelty - (yes) Inventive step - (yes) Appeal decision - remittal to the department of first instance (yes) |
Application titleSYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PACKAGING CUTTING BLADES |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2022:T207318.20220110 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 278 KB) |
|||
T 0494/18 (Manufacturing a multi-ply tissue paper/SCA Tissue France) of 15.10.2021 | |||||
Online on03.01.2022 |
Board3.3.06 |
Decision date15.10.2021 |
Proc. languageEN |
IPCD21H 27/02D21H 27/30 D21H 27/00 B31F 1/07 |
Application no.12305973.5 |
CatchwordA request in which some claims have been deleted compared to the requests that were filed previously with the grounds of appeal or the reply is, according to the systematic context of Article 12(3) RPBA 2020 and Article 13 RPBA 2020, a new request and thus usually amounts to an "amendment to the party's appeal case". |
|||||
KeywordsLate-filed auxiliary request 8 filed during the oral proceedings before the Board - admittance (yes) - formally allowable (yes) - inventive step (yes) |
Application titleMulti-ply tissue paper product and method for manufacturing the same |
||||
European Case Law IdentifierECLI:EP:BA:2021:T049418.20211015 |
DistributionD |
DecisionDecision text in EN (PDF, 487 KB) |