| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T097010.20120516 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 16 May 2012 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0970/10 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 06113169.4 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H04Q 7/38 H04Q 7/32 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Method and apparatus for routing a call to a dual mode wireless device | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | AT&T Corp. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Refusal based on a post-published state of the art document Remittal - yes Substantial procedural violation/reimbursement of the appeal fee - no |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
A decision relying on a post-published document which does not form part of the state of the art under Article 54(2) EPC does not constitute a substantial procedural violation justifying reimbursement of the appeal fee. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t100970eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021