by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 2 360 484 B1 relates to a bidirectional wireless data transmission method.
Brief outline of the case
The patent as granted infringed Art 123(2) and the filed AR were not allowable under Art 123(2) or 84, or not admitted.
The patent was thus revoked by the OD and the proprietor appealed.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 2 376 810 B1 relates to a cast part, planet carrier, hollow shaft and planetary gear.
Brief outline of the case
The patent was revoked and the proprietor appealed.
The revocation was based on a Public Prior Use by Opponent 2.
The OD took a decision on the taking of evidence.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 021 545 B1 relates to a “Hearing instrument with an authentication protocol” more precisely to an encrypted wireless broadcast transmissions from an external audio source to a hearing aid.
Brief outline of the case
The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed.
The board held that claim 1 as granted comprised added subject-matter.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 296 372 B1 relates to a solvent-based coating composition.
Brief outline of the case
The OD decided that claim 1 as granted was lacking N over D1=WO 2015/082553, not mentioned in the ESR.
AR1and AR2 lacked IS over D1. The patent was maintained according to AR3.
Both the proprietor and the opponent appealed.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 049 439 B1 relates to bispecific polypeptides.
Brief outline of the case
The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed.
The MR corresponds to the patent as granted.
The opponent did not attend the OP before the board, but maintained its written submissions.
In the statement of grounds of appeal the opponent referred to the notice of opposition,