T 0131/01 () of 18.7.2002

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2002:T013101.20020718
Date of decision: 18 July 2002
Case number: T 0131/01
Application number: 95926656.0
IPC class: F16J 15/32
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: A
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 41 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: OJ | Published
Title of application: Bidirectional shaft seal
Applicant name: Mather Seal Company
Opponent name: CR Elastomere GmbH
Board: 3.2.01
Headnote: In a case where a patent has been opposed under Article 100(a) EPC on the grounds of lack of novelty and inventive step having regard to a prior art document, and the ground of lack of novelty has been substantiated pursuant to Rule 55(c), a specific substantiation of the ground of lack of inventive step is neither necessary - given that novelty is a prerequisite for determining whether an invention involves an inventive step and such prerequisite is allegedly not satisfied - nor generally possible without contradicting the reasoning presented in support of lack of novelty.
In such a case, the objection of lack of inventive step is not a fresh ground for opposition and can consequently be examined in the appeal proceedings without the agreement of the patentee (see point 3.1 of the reasons).
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 54
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 56
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 100(a)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 104(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 114(2)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 55(c)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 71a(1)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal (yes)
Admissibility of opposition (yes)
Ground of lack of inventive step in respect of alleged novelty destroying prior art raised in the notice of opposition but not specifically substantiated
Fresh ground of opposition (no)
Arguments submitted late (not excluded under Article 114(2) and Rule 71a(1))
Request for apportionment of costs (refused)
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
G 0009/91
G 0010/91
G 0004/92
G 0007/95
T 0220/83
T 0213/85
T 0937/91
T 0514/92
T 1002/92
Citing decisions:
T 0952/99
T 1077/00
T 1105/00
T 0174/01
T 1226/01
T 1192/02
T 0281/03
T 0448/03
T 1027/03
T 0428/05
T 1579/05
T 0353/06
T 0635/06
T 0597/07
T 1052/07
T 1553/07
T 1225/08
T 1142/09
T 2430/09
T 1914/12
T 2589/12
T 1029/14
T 0299/15
T 0496/15
T 0710/15
T 2238/15
T 0184/17
T 0435/17

33 references found.

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

Offical Journal of the EPO

Case Law Book: III Amendments

Case Law Book: IV Divisional Applications

Case Law Book: V Priority

Case Law of the Enlarged Board

General Case Law