The patent relates to a heated aerosol generating article with thermal spreading wrap (1222-aluminium foil). The heated aerosol-generating article may comprise a plurality of elements, including the aerosol forming substrate (1020-homogenised tobacco), assembled within a wrapper, such as a cigarette paper (1060) to form a rod. The heated aerosol generating article has the form of a classical cigarette.
CASELAW-EPO - reviews of EPO Boards of Appeal decisions
T 2872/19 – AR not admitted in appeal for lack of substantiation
This invention relates to tap changers and more particularly to load tap changers in electric transformers.
Brief outline of the case
The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed this decision.
The board decided that claim 1 as granted lacked IS over D3= D3=EP 0 907 192 and D13=Weidauer,
T 664/20 – Obligations (?) of an opponent when entering appeal
The patent relates to an adhesive composition based on ethylene copolymers, useful for extrusion coating and extrusion lamination on a variety of supports.
Brief outline of the procedure
In a first decision, T 1143/17, after revocation due to infringement of Art 123(2), the corresponding decision of the OD was set aside and the file remitted to the OD for further prosecution.
T 664/20 – Use mentioned in a product claim – "Cascading" claims
The patent relates to an adhesive composition based on ethylene copolymers, useful for extrusion coating and extrusion lamination on a variety of supports.
Brief outline of the procedure
See the corresponding publication in the present blog.
In this discussion, the question of onus of proof of the proprietor when a use is mentioned in a product claim and the interpretation of cascading claims are touchd upon.
T 602/21 – Two step application Art 13(2) RPBA – Deletion of claims/Diverging case law
The present patent results from a divisional application of EP06726789/EP 1 877 486.
The patent relates to acrylic blends of low molecular weight acrylic polymers with high molecular weight acrylic polymers.
Brief outline of the case
The patent was maintained according to a new MR filed during OP before the OD.