|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2013:T245912.20131017|
|Date of decision:||17 October 2013|
|Case number:||T 2459/12|
|IPC class:||G09G 3/36
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD, RECORDING MEDIUM, AND PROGRAM|
|Applicant name:||Sony Corporation|
|Relevant legal provisions:|
|Keywords:||Applicant entitled to pursue subject-matter not covered by the European search report (no)
Applicant entitled to have further search report drawn up (no)
Applicability of Rule 137(5) EPC
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (no)
The approach to the application of Rule 164(2) EPC which is set out in the Guidelines is confirmed (point 3.9).
Where, following the drawing up of a supplementary European search report by the EPO, an applicant files amended claims seeking protection for subject-matter which is not covered by the supplementary European search report as a result of the application of Rule 164(1) EPC, an objection under Rule 137(5) EPC should be raised (point 4.3).
Non-compliance with Rule 137(5) EPC is a ground for refusing an application (point 5.3).
A question regarding a point of law, the answer to which would affect only a relatively small number of applicants for a limited period of time, after which it would become obsolete, is not to be regarded as a question relating to a point of law of fundamental importance and therefore does not warrant a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (point 6).
Date retrieved: 30 December 2018