| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2017:T144012.20170627 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 27 June 2017 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1440/12 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 99905225.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H01J 61/20 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | MERCURY-FREE METAL HALIDE LAMP | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Toshiba Lighting & Technology Corporation | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | OSRAM GmbH | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.4.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Claims - clarity (no) Basis of decision - text submitted or agreed by patent proprietor (no) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
In the case of opposition, the intention behind Article 113(2) EPC 1973 is that the EPO may not maintain a patent according to a particular text unless the proprietor has consented unambiguously to the patent being maintained in that form. The "text submitted" is to be understood to mean a text submitted by the proprietor with the clear intention that the patent be maintained according to that text, at least as an auxiliary measure (Reasons, point 10.2). |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t121440eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021