by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a box of cigarettes comprising a wrapper with a removable portion.
The part of the wrapper which can be seen when opening the box (24) bears a different sign (indicia) as the part which remain invisible before the wrapper is removed (26).
Brief outline of the case
The patent was revoked and the proprietor appealed.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent is the result of a divisional application of EP04752581/1 641 809. The patent relates to a “Method and Compositions for Detection and Enumeration of Genetic Variations”.
Brief outline of the case
The patent was revoked and the proprietor appealed.
The MR=AR3 was lacking N over D4=WO 2004/069849 with D4a=P4=US 60/476,504=priority application of D4,
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to an apparatus and a method for the control of a modular power converter with distributed energy storages.
Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the rejection of the opposition by the OD.
The board held that claim 1 as granted infringed Art 123(2). AR1-3 were not admitted under Art 12(3 and 5) RPBA for lack of substantiation.
by Daniel X. Thomas
T 2194/19 was already commented in this blog, on the adaptation of the description. The case is interesting for another reason. The proprietor suggested to refer a number of questions to the EBA about the relationship between Art 69 and 123(3).
The proprietor’s point of view
The proprietor submitted that the scope of protection of granted claim 1 must at least include the “Third Embodiment”
by Daniel X. Thomas
Brief outline of the case
D23 and D26 were not admitted by the OD under R 116(1).
The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed.
The opponent’s late objection as regards lack of IS over D18 against claim 1 of the granted patent was admitted into the appeal proceedings.