Updates on EPC, PCT, EPO case law and the e-EQE

The patent results from a divisional application of EP 09732113/2 291 195, and relates to a vaccine for protection against Lawsonia intracellularis, Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae and Porcine circo virus.

Brief outline of the case

The OD held inter alia that the sole claim of the patent as granted (claim 1) did not contain subject-matter which extended beyond the content of the application and the earlier application,

The patent relates to heart valve prostheses, namely implantable replacement heart valves.

Brief outline of the case

The proprietor and the opponent appealed the maintenance in amended form according to AR 2.

The proprietor requested maintenance as granted and filed AR 1-8

The opponent requested revocation of the patent.

Introduction of a new ground of opposition in appeal

Independently of the Rules of Procedure, a new ground of opposition can only be raised before a Board of Appeal if the proprietor consents to its introduction, cf. G 10/91, 1993, 408 as well as G 1/95 and G 7/95,

The patent relates to a disposable diaper.  

Brief outline of the case

The proprietor appealed the revocation of the patent.

The OD had decided that the ground of opposition under Art 100(c) was prejudicial to maintenance of the patent as granted. The other AR were offending Art 123(2).

The patent relates to an “Assembly and method for checking rod-shaped articles from the tobacco processing industry”.

Brief outline of the case

The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed.

Referring to G 1/21, the opponent requested that the OP should not take place in form of a ViCo.