Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1445 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1445 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Optional parameter $type declared before required parameter $nid is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 1445 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).

R 0009/09 () of 22.3.2010

European Case Law Identifier:

ECLI:EP:BA:2010:R000909.20100322

Date of decision:

22 March 2010

Case number:

R 0009/09

Petition for review of:

Application number:

IPC class:

Language of proceedings:

EN

Distribution:

B

Download and more information:

Decision text in EN (PDF, 82Â 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Versions:	Unpublished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 electrolytic production of highly pure zinc or zinc compounds from primary and secondary zinc raw materials

Applicant name:

Tecnicas Reunidas, S.A.

Opponent name:

Outokumpu Oy

Board:

EBA

Headnote:

Petition rejected as clearly inadmissible
Objection raised in respect of a procedural defect during the oral proceeedings(no)

Relevant legal provisions:

European Patent Convention Art 123(2)
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention Art 113
European Patent Convention Art 114(2)
European Patent Convention Art 134(8)
European Patent Convention Art 112a(1)
European Patent Convention Art 112a(2)
European Patent Convention Art 112a(4)
European Patent Convention R 106
European Patent Convention R 107(1)(b)
European Patent Convention R 107(2)
European Patent Convention R 109(2)(a)
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)

Keywords:

-

Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:

-

Citing decisions:

R 0014/11
R 0001/14
R 0003/14
R 0009/14
T 0518/10

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/r090009eu1.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021

18 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.56 EPC Inventive step

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

X A.114 EPC Examination by the European Patent Office of its own motion

X A.123 EPC Amendments

X A.134 EPC Representation before the European Patent Office

EPC Implementing Rules

X R.106 EPC Obligation to raise objections

X R.107 EPC Contents of the petition for review

X R.109 EPC Procedure in dealing with petitions for review

Case Law Book: V Priority

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

X CLR V B 3.6.2.B Objection raised in good time by persons capable of validly doing so

X CLR V B 3.6.3 Examples of invalid objections

General Case Law

X R 0014/11 (Objection under Rule 106 EPC/Celanese International) of 5.7.2012

X R 0001/14 () of 21.1.2015

X R 0003/14 () of 7.7.2014

X R 0009/14 (Fundamental violation of Art. 13(1) EPC) of 24.2.2015

X T 0071/06 () of 15.10.2008

X T 0518/10 (Lucenin-2 in krill oil extracts/NEPTUNE) of 9.4.2013