| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1995:T040594.19950712 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 12 July 1995 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0405/94 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 88300349.3 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | G01G 19/04 G01G 3/14 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Weight sensing apparatus | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Bolland, George Barry | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Carl Schenck AG | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.4.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Document with unproved date of publication and of availability of its content: no state of the art Objection in letter of other party: opportunity to comment (yes) Non-enabling document: not citable as novelty destroying Novelty (yes) Inventive step (yes) Novelty - availability to the public Novelty - disclosed content of prior publication - enabling disclosure Inventive step |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
A party which, although made aware by at least one letter of another party that the availability to the public of the content of a thesis is objected and which does not react before the oral proceedings at which a decision can be taken, or which only provides at said oral proceedings information which is found to need confirmation, has had sufficient opportunity to comment on said objection so that there is no justification to give him further opportunity for providing such confirmation (cf. point 3). |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t940405eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021