| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T183911.20120629 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 29 June 2012 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1839/11 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 05785170.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | A23K 1/00 A23K 1/165 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Enzyme granules | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Novozymes A/S | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | DANISCO A/S | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.09 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | 1. A document filed in proceedings and which serves the purpose of informing the public about the patent may not ordinarily be excluded from file inspection under Rule 144 EPC and Article 1(2) of the Decision of the President dated 12 July 2007 even though such inspection would be prejudicial to the legitimate personal or economic interests of natural or legal persons (Points 3.2 - 3.6). 2. Where a filed document contains information, some of which serves the purpose of informing the public about the patent but some of which does not, the filing of a version of the document in a form from which the latter information has been redacted may form the proper basis for an order excluding the unredacted document from file inspection under Rule 144 EPC, the redacted version being open to file inspection (Points 3.8 and 3.11). |
||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Admissibility of new requests (no) Exclusion from file inspection |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t111839eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021