| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T170406.20071214 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 14 December 2007 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1704/06 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 99964344.8 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | G06F 17/60 A63F 5/00 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Methods of paying winning bets | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Rudd, Clarence Ernest | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | - | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
In the situation where an appellant submits new claims after oral proceedings have been arranged but does not attend these proceedings, a board can refuse the new claims for substantive reasons, specifically lack of inventive step, even if the claims have not been discussed before and were filed in good time before the oral proceedings. This will in particular be the case if an examination of these substantive requirements is to be expected in the light of the prevailing legal and factual situation (point 7.6 of the reasons). |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: | |||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t061704eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021