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,
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a fabric treatment composition, exactly to a softener.
Brief outline of the case
Opponent 2 appealed the decision to reject the opposition.
In appeal there was a long discussion about experimental data submitted by all the parties. Those data were all post-published.
There was unanimity among the parties that D1=DE 10 2006 034 051,
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a “flexible” electrical connector for connection to an electrical element on a substrate such as glazing in a vehicle.
Brief outline of the case
Opponent 1 appealed the decision of maintenance according to AR3.
The board decided to revoke the patent as the subject-matter of claim 1 as maintained and of AR1 was lacking IS over E1=DE 103 01 352 + D3=US 5,920,125.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The application relates to a heat exchanger arrangement with a sensor (40) in a sensor receiving opening (42), wherein the sensor is supported on an inner wall (30) by a biasing member (52) arranged between the sensor (40) and a biasing member abutment region (74) provided on the outer housing (58).
Brief outline of the case
The application was refused for lack of IS with D2 as CPA.
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates generally to gas turbine engines, and, more specifically, to turbine blade cooling.
Brief outline of the case
The ISR established by the EPO mentions 2 Y and 3 A documents.
The opponent appealed the OD’s decision to reject the opposition.
The board decided that the closest prior art was D1=EP 1 361 337 (1st Y in ISR).