European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1991:T078389.19910219 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Date of decision: | 19 February 1991 | ||||||||
Case number: | T 0783/89 | ||||||||
Application number: | 82300848.7 | ||||||||
IPC class: | G03G 15/00 | ||||||||
Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
Distribution: | |||||||||
Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
Title of application: | Display device for a machine | ||||||||
Applicant name: | Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba | ||||||||
Opponent name: | 1) Xerox Corporation 2) Almagrange Ltd. |
||||||||
Board: | 3.4.02 | ||||||||
Headnote: | - | ||||||||
Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
Keywords: | Inventive step (no) Reimbursement of appeal fees (yes) |
||||||||
Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
Citing decisions: |
|
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t890783eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
4 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Case Law Book: III Amendments
XCLR III B 2.6.1.A Cases in which Article 113(1) EPC was violated in relation to the introduction of new claims or relevant documents
XCLR III B 2.6.1.B Cases in which Article 113(1) EPC was not violated even though new claims or relevant documents were introduced