| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2000:T072898.20000512 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 12 May 2000 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0728/98 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 96200338.0 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C07D 211/22 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | A | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Synthesis of substantially pure terfenadine derivatives | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | ALBANY MOLECULAR RESEARCH, INC. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | 1. It follows from the requirement of legal certainty that a claim cannot be considered clear in the sense of Article 84 EPC if it comprises an unclear technical feature (here "substantially pure") for which no unequivocal generally accepted meaning exists in the relevant art. This applies all the more if the unclear feature is essential for delimiting the subject-matter claimed from the prior art. (see reasons point 3) 2. Where the claimed purity level of a low molecular chemical compound (here a terfenadine derivative) turns out to be successfully achieved by applying a conventional purification method on a reaction mixture disclosed in the prior art, an exceptional situation such as addressed in the decision T 990/96 does not exist. This would have required evidence that conventional methods could not achieve that purity level. Therefore the general rule applies that the level of purity of that low molecular compound cannot entail novelty. That general rule is valid also in the case of a product-by-process claim where that purity level is the inevitable result of the preparation process indicated in the claim. (see reasons point 6) |
||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Clarity of claim (no) - no unequivocal meaning of essential feature ('substantially pure') designed for delimiting claim from prior art Amendment (not allowable) - deletion of essential feature Novelty (no) - product-by-process claim directed to product per se - purity level of chemical compound achievable by means of conventional purification method - no exceptional situation (cf. T 990/96) - purity as such not a distinguishing product feature |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: | |||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t980728ex1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
45 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)