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).

T 0136/01 () of 30.11.2005

European Case Law Identifier:

ECLI:EP:BA:2005:T013601.20051130

Date of decision:

30 November 2005

Case number:

T 0136/01

Application number:

IPC class:

Language of proceedings:

EN

Distribution:

C

Download and more information:

Decision text in EN (PDF, 90Â KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in:	EN
Versions:	Unpublished

Title of application:

Organic electroluminescence device

Applicant name:

SUMITOMO CHEMICAL COMPANY LIMITED

Opponent name:

Cambridge Display Technology Limited
Hoechst AG

Board:

3.4.03

Headnote:

-

Relevant legal provisions:

European Patent Convention 1973 Art 107
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 87(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 54
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 56

Keywords:

Admissibility of the appeal (yes)
Main and first auxiliary request: novelty (no)
Second auxiliary request: novelty (yes), inventive step (yes)

Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:

G 0004/88
G 0003/97
G 0002/98
G 0002/04
T 0870/92
T 0799/97
T 1137/97
T 0602/99
T 0854/99

Citing decisions:

T 1421/05
T 1533/07
T 0680/08
T 2357/12

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t010136eu1.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021

12 references found.

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

Case Law Book: II Conditions to be met by an Application

X CLR II D 3.1.7 Error margins and definitions of limits

Case Law Book: III Amendments

X CLR III O 2.3 Transfer together with the business assets to which the opposition relates

Case Law of the Enlarged Board

X G 0004/88 (Transfer of opposition) of 24.4.1989

X G 0003/97 (Opposition on behalf of a third party) of 21.1.1999

X G 0002/98 (Requirement for claiming priority of the "same invention") of 31.5.2001

X G 0002/04 (Transfer of opposition/HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) of 25.5.2005

General Case Law

X T 0870/92 () of 8.8.1997

X T 0799/97 (Ãbertragung der Einsprechendenstellung/DIEBALL GMBH) of 4.7.2001

X T 1137/97 (Marek's Disease Virus Vaccine/AMERICAN HOME PRODUCTS CORPORATION) of 14.10.2002

X T 1421/05 () of 18.1.2011

X T 1533/07 () of 6.10.2009

X T 2357/12 (Universal succession) of 28.11.2013