Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Optional parameter $type declared before required parameter $nid is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).

R 0017/14 () of 15.12.2015

European Case Law Identifier:

ECLI:EP:BA:2015:R001714.20151215

Datum der Entscheidung:

15 Dezember 2015

Aktenzeichen:

R 0017/14

Antrag auf Überprüfung von:

Anmeldenummer:

IPC-Klasse:

G09F 3/20
G09F 7/12

Verfahrenssprache:

DE

Verteilung:

B

Download und weitere Informationen:

Text der Entscheidung in DE (PDF, 54Â KB)
Alle Dokumente zum Beschwerdeverfahren finden Sie im Register
Bibliografische Daten verfügbar in:	DE
Fassungen:	Unpublished

Bezeichnung der Anmeldung:

AdhÃ¤sionsfolie

Name des Anmelders:

VISI/ONE GmbH

Name des Einsprechenden:

Fa. Franz HROCH
AHB-Autohandel-Bedarf GmbH

Kammer:

EBA

Leitsatz:

-

Relevante Rechtsnormen:

European Patent Convention Art 58
European Patent Convention Art 112a(4)
European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(c)
European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)(d)
European Patent Convention Art 113
European Patent Convention Art 113(1)
European Patent Convention R 104
European Patent Convention R 104(b)
European Patent Convention R 106
European Patent Convention R 107
Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 13
Rules of procedure of the Enlarged Board of Appeal Art 14(2)
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(6)
Deutsche Zivilprozessordnung Â§ 156, 321a(2), 544(7)
Deutsches Patentgesetz Â§ 122a

Schlagwörter:

ÃberprÃ¼fungsantrag offensichtlich unbegrÃ¼ndet fehlende Kausalzusammenhang

Orientierungssatz:

-

Angeführte Entscheidungen:

G 0001/13
R 0001/08
R 0011/08
R 0006/09
R 0011/09
R 0016/09
R 0019/09
R 0001/10

Anführungen in anderen Entscheidungen:

R 0001/16
R 0006/18
T 1742/12

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/r140017du1.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021

21 references found.

Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.

EPC Articles

X A.58 EPC Entitlement to file a European patent application

X A.112a EPC Article 112a Petition for review by the Enlarged Board of Appeal

X A.113 EPC Right to be heard and basis of decisions

EPC Implementing Rules

X R.104 EPC Further fundamental procedural defects

X R.106 EPC Obligation to raise objections

X R.107 EPC Contents of the petition for review

Case Law Book: V Priority

X CLR V B 3.4.3 No suspensory effect – review of substantive law excluded

X CLR V B 3.6.2.A Recognisable immediately as an objection, defect clear and unambiguous

X CLR V B 3.6.6 Compliance with Rule 106 EPC EPC left open

X CLR V B 4.3.2 "Fundamental" violation of Article 113 EPC – causal link and adverse effect

X CLR V B 4.3.14 No right to a referral under Article 112 EPC

Case Law of the Enlarged Board

X G 0001/13 (Fischer-Tropsch Catalysts/SASOL TECHNOLOGY II) of 25.11.2014

General Case Law

X R 0001/08 () of 15.7.2008

X R 0011/08 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC and procedural defect under … of 6.4.2009

X R 0006/09 (Fundamental width of Article 113 EPC/WATTEX) of 3.6.2009

X R 0011/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113 EPC/AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS) of 22.11.2010

X R 0016/09 () of 19.5.2010

X R 0019/09 (Fundamental violation of Article 113/UNAXIS) of 24.3.2010

X R 0001/10 (Offensichtlich unzulÃ¤ssiger ÃberprÃ¼fungsantrag/Ahrweiler) of 22.2.2011

X R 0001/16 (Antrag auf ÃberprÃ¼fung) of 22.5.2017

X T 1742/12 (On-demand instantiation/RAYTHEON) of 22.6.2016