by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 071 045 B1 relates to a method of extraction of pea proteins
Brief outline of the case
The patent was maintained according to AR6.
Both proprietor and both opponents appealed. Later, opponent 1 withdrew its appeal.
The patent was eventually maintained according to AR1 filed and admitted in appeal.
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 468 222 B1 relates to a headphone. It aims at providing a headphone that does not completely shield the wearer off from the outside acoustic environment.
Brief outline of the case
For the OD, claim 1 as granted lacked N over D1. All AR on file were not allowable under Art 54,
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 528 847 B1 relates to relates to a pharmaceutical preparation of thyroid hormone T4 in an alcohol-free water-glycerol solution.
Brief outline of the case
The opposition was rejected and the opponent appealed.
The board decided that claim 1 as granted lacked IS.
As AR1 was not admitted under Art 12(3+4) RPBA,
by Daniel X. Thomas
EP 3 690 761 A1 relates to the provision of adaptive deep learning models calibrated and personalized for “users” of autonomous vehicles.
Brief outline of the case
The application was refused as the MR, AR2 and 3 lacked IS over D1= US2018/0053102 A1.
AR1 filed during OP was not admitted.