Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the rejection of its opposition.
In its decision the board held that claims 1 (method) and 9 (device) as granted lacked IS over D3=DE 10 2008 019 605+D1=US 4 947 617.
Updates on EPC, PCT, EPO case law and the e-EQE
T 324/21 - Trap-like situation between lack of IS and intermediate generalisation
by Daniel X. Thomas
Application EP3364729 relates to the improvement of heat dissipation on a printed circuit board (PCB).
Brief outline of the case
The application was refused for lack of IS and lack of clarity.
The applicant appealed.
In appeal, the MR was not allowable under Art 123(2) and AR 1 and 2 not admitted under Art 13(2) and 13(1) RPBA.
T 196/22 - 6 differences with the CPA – No synergy
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a battery driven lawn mower.
Brief outline of the case
The patent was maintained according to AR 6.
Both opponents appealed.
The board held that claim 1 of AR 6 was lacking IS over D2=DE 195 28 167 with common general knowledge.
AR 11a,
T 1356/21 - Limits to the application of the concept of bonus effect
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to long-acting formulations of insulin.
Brief outline of the case
The opponent appealed the decision of maintenance according to a new MR filed during OP before the OD.
In the summons to OP before the OD, the OD held that claim 1 as granted lacked N over D1=US 2004/048783,
T 1246/21 – Assessing IS = more than just combining documents – Common general knowledge also plays a role
by Daniel X. Thomas
The present invention generally relates to an optical system for projecting one or more synthetic optical images, which demonstrates improved resistance to optically degrading external effects.
Brief outline of the case
The proprietor appealed the revocation of its patent.
The board confirmed that claim 1 as granted contravened Art 123(2)
Admissible AR were not allowable,