| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2004:T035702.20040730 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 30 July 2004 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0357/02 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 95914085.6 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C08F 10/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Process for transitioning between incompatible polymerization catalysts | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | ExxonMobil Chemical Patents Inc. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Basell Polyolefine GmbH BP Chemicals Ltd Mobil Oil Corporation |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Novelty (yes) Inventive step - problem and solution Inventive step - obvious combination of known features |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
It follows from the minimalist character of a technical problem objectively arising from a closest state of the art, which can only be formulated as a modification of that state of the art, regardless of a success or failure of the measures applied, that almost any modification of the latter might be regarded as a feasible alternative by a person skilled in the relevant art, and therefore obvious, since each corresponding solution would be equally useful (or useless). (cf. Reasons 6.2) |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t020357eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021