| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1989:T041687.19890629 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 29 June 1989 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0416/87 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 81305931.8 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C08F 297/04 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | A | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | - | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | JSR | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Hüls | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | 1. If the description on its proper interpretation specifies a feature to be an overriding requirement of the invention, following Article 69(1) EPC and its Protocol the claims may be interpreted as requiring this as an essential feature, even though the wording of the claims when read in isolation does not specifically require such feature (see Reasons paragraph 5). 2. In a case where a prior document is cited by an opponent for the first time during the appeal stage of an opposition and is considered by the Board to be the closest prior art and therefore admissible but not such as to prejudice maintenance of the patent, the Board may itself examine and decide the matter under Article 111(1) EPC rather than remit the matter to the first instance (see Reasons paragraph 9). In such a case an apportionment of costs may be made against the opponent in respect of the submission of evidence in reply by the patentee, following Decision T 117/86 Costs/(FILMTEC (OJ EPO 1989, 401) (see Reasons paragraph 10). |
||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Novelty (yes) Inventive step (yes) Late filed document is closest prior art but does not prejudice maintenance of patent Document admitted Exercise of discretion under Article 111(1) EPC No remittal to Opposition Division Late filed document first relied upon in grounds of appeal Documents relied upon before Oppositon Division not relied upon in grounds of appeal Abuse of procedure Apportionment of costs |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: | |||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t870416ex1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
27 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Offical Journal of the EPO
XOJ EPO SE 1/2021, p179 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2020)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2020, p174 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2019)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2019, p158 - XVI. - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2018)