by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to improvements insecurity substrates for security documents.
Brief outline of the case
The OD decided that claim 1 as granted was lacking N over D1=WO2004/056582 not mentioned in the ISR established by the EPO.
The patent was maintained according to AR6.
Both the opponent and the proprietor appealed the OD’s decision.
A big advantage of our online references is that they are automatically updated without disturbing your own notes. Any errors can be corrected immediately, and legal changes can be incorporated regularly.
This year, there have been no major legal updates in PCT, and very few significant updates in the guidelines and applicants guides.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a fluidized bed heat exchanger.
Brief outline of the procedure
The proprietor appealed the revocation of the patent.
The patent was revoked for lack of N over, E1=US 5 218 931 and E7=US 5,325,823, both not mentioned in the ESR. The ESR mentioned 4X and 1A document.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to an “Arrangement and method for the contrast improvement in a charged particle beam device for inspecting a specimen”
Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the rejection of its opposition.
The board confirmed the rejection of the opposition.
The whole discussion turned about the relevance of E2=EP 1 068 630.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to security systems and more particular to wireless sensors used within such systems. It provides for automatic reporting of prognosis data from wireless mesh sensors.
Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the OD’s decision to reject the opposition.
The board set aside the decision of the OD and decided revocation for lack of sufficiency under Art 100(b) for the granted patent and Art 83 for all AR.
