| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T141705.20081204 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 04 December 2008 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1417/05 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 96110085.6 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | G06F 3/13 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Printer control with monitor function | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | CANON KABUSHIKI KAISHA | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.05 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Impermissible extension of subject-matter (main request) Lack of clarity (first auxiliary request) Lack of inventive step (second auxiliary request) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
The distinguishing features of the claimed invention (second auxiliary request) were presented in the application as filed as a mere design alternative having no significant technical impact. This has consequences for the board's assessment of inventive step, cf. points 4.6-4.11. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t051417eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021