by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to a disposable diaper.
Brief outline of the case
The proprietor appealed the revocation of the patent.
The OD had decided that the ground of opposition under Art 100(c) was prejudicial to maintenance of the patent as granted. The other AR were offending Art 123(2).
by Daniel X. Thomas
Brief outline of the case in T 758/20
The patent relates to a rotary conveyor drum for transferring rod-like elements for use in tobacco industry machines.
The ISR established by the EPO mentioned 5 A documents.
The OD decided that claim 1 as granted was lacking N over D1=US 3 267 821 (Not in the ISR).
by Daniel X. Thomas
Those two decisions have taken place on 22.11.2022 (T1158/20) and on 13.12.2022 (T 1624/20), but have only been published recently.
Both cases are interesting in the way they dealt with the requests for OP of the parties.
T 1158/20
The patent relates to “a method of controlling mass flow in the form of multi-layer stream of rod-shaped articles,
by Daniel X. Thomas
The patent relates to the U and results from a divisional application of EP 07861777/EP 2 086 581
Brief outline of the case
The patent was revoked by the OD.
The proprietor appealed the decision and requested OP by ViCo.
The opponent did not consent to this request and suggested a mixed mode format.
by Daniel X. Thomas
Brief outline of the procedure
The appellant/opponent appealed the OD’s decision to reject the opposition.
By letter dated 29.06.22, the opponent requested that the OP be held in person instead of by ViCo.
Opponent’s representative is based in Munich. Respondent’s/proprietor’s opponent is based in Wiesbaden.
The board decided on 21.07.2022 to hold the OP by ViCo.