| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1994:T056691.19940518 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 18 May 1994 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0566/91 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 83303845.8 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | A61K 9/20 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Nystatin pastille formulation | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Dr. R. Pfleger Chemische Fabrik GmbH | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | New document used by Opposition Division - more complete version of a cited document - no procedural violation Late-filed documents - refused except one relevant Disregard of auxiliary requests by Opposition Division - substantial procedural violation (yes) - refund of appeal fees precluded Inventive step - obvious solution |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t910566eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
5 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: I Patentability
Case Law Book: III Amendments
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