|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T014409.20110504|
|Date of decision:||04 May 2011|
|Case number:||T 0144/09|
|Petition for review:||R 0011/11|
|IPC class:||B66B 11/00|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Traction sheave elevator|
|Applicant name:||Kone Corporation|
|Opponent name:||INVENTIO AG
ORONA E.I.C S. Coop.
Otis Elevator Company
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Main request and first, second, fourth and sixth auxiliary requests - not admitted (Art. 12(4) RPBA)
Third auxiliary request - added subject-matter (Art. 123(2) EPC)
Fifth auxiliary request - not admitted (Art. 13(1) RPBA)
Referral of question to Enlarged Board of Appeal - rejected
Objection under Rule 106 EPC - dismissed
Apportionment of costs - requests rejected
1. A request can be held inadmissible under Article 12(4) RPBA when added subject-matter held unallowable during proceedings before the opposition division is not removed at least by way of an auxiliary request filed in those proceedings, but only by way of a request filed during the appeal proceedings (Reasons 1.4).
2. The applicability of Article 12(4) RPBA is not restricted by the time limit for filing the grounds of appeal or any reply thereto (Reasons 1.17).
Date retrieved: 30 December 2018