T 0230/07 (Colloidal binder/PAROC) of 5.5.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T023007.20100505
Date of decision: 05 May 2010
Case number: T 0230/07
Application number: 01947491.5
IPC class: B01J 13/00
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: B
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 108 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method for the preparation of a colloidal silicate dispersion
Applicant name: Paroc Oy Ab
Opponent name: ROCKWOOL INTERNATIONAL A/S
Board: 3.3.05
Headnote: Novelty and inventive step are two distinct requirements for the patentability of an invention and therefore different criteria should apply for their assessment. So, when assessing novelty of an invention, the presence or absence of a technical effect within a sub-range of numerical values is not to be taken into account in the assessment of novelty.
For establishing novelty of a sub-range of numerical values from a broader range, the selected sub-range should be narrow and sufficiently far removed from the known broader range illustrated by means of examples. A sub-range is not rendered novel by virtue of a newly discovered effect occurring within it.
Reasons 4.1.6.
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 54(1)
European Patent Convention Art 54(2)
European Patent Convention Art 54(3)
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention Art 83
European Patent Convention Art 123(2)
Keywords: Sufficiency of disclosure (yes)
Novelty (yes)
Inventive step (yes): non-obvious alternative
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
T 0198/84
T 0124/87
T 0279/89
T 0666/89
T 0012/90
T 0720/96
T 1233/05
Citing decisions:
T 0110/07
T 1761/08
T 2299/08
T 1130/09
T 2041/09
T 0492/10
T 1948/10
T 0378/12
T 0423/12
T 1404/14
T 0261/15
T 0305/16
T 1924/16
T 1608/17

19 references found.

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

EPC Articles

Case Law Book: I Patentability

General Case Law