T 0087/08 () of 11.2.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T008708.20100211
Date of decision: 11 February 2010
Case number: T 0087/08
Application number: 01900995.0
IPC class: A61K 7/48
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: B
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 33 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Shadow-effect cosmetic composition
Applicant name: Color Access, Inc.
Opponent name: L'OREAL
Board: 3.3.10
Headnote: Article 56 EPC requires that the assessment of inventive step is made "having regard to the state of the art". Accordingly, a decision is not sufficiently reasoned in the sense of Rule 68(2) EPC 1973 (Rule 111(2) EPC 2000) if the chain of reasoning to justify the finding of lack of inventive step merely states that a purported effect has not been achieved, i.e. this technical problem had not been solved, without reformulating the problem in a less ambitious way and without assessing obviousness of the claimed solution to that reformulated problem in the light of the cited prior art.
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 54
European Patent Convention Art 56
European Patent Convention 1973 R 67
European Patent Convention 1973 R 68(2)
Keywords: Novelty (yes) : selection within 2 lists
Inventive step : fresh case, new closest prior art document
Procedural violation (yes) : decision not reasoned
Remittal (yes) : reimbursement of appeal fees (yes)
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
T 0012/81
T 0278/00
T 1366/05
Citing decisions:
T 0716/08
T 1069/08
T 1079/08
T 0306/09
T 1036/09
T 2375/10
T 1212/11
T 2186/11
T 1841/12
T 2135/13

16 references found.

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

EPC Articles

EPO Guidelines - G Patentability

Case Law Book: I Patentability

Case Law Book: III Amendments

Case Law Book: V Priority

General Case Law