The appeal further requested rectification of the impugned decision under Article 109(1) EPC and the reimbursement of the appeal fee under Rule 103(1)(a) EPC. The appellant requested that the appealed decision be set aside and that a patent be granted on the basis of the claims of a sole request filed with the statement of grounds of appeal. During the examination proceedings, the examining division referred inter alia to the following prior-art document:
The appeal was lodged against the decision of the examining division to refuse the present European patent application for lack of novelty (Article 54(3) EPC) with respect to the independent claims of a sole set of claims (sole request). Inconsistency between Guidelines and Case Lawĭifferent interpretation of Article 109(1) EPC from that provided for in the Guidelines for Examination in the EPO - application of ArticleĢ0(2) RPBA 2020 (see point 2.4.3 of the Reasons).
Partial reimbursement of appeal fee at 25% - (yes): timely withdrawal of request for oral proceedings Remittal - (yes): special reasons for remittal Interlocutory revision - examining division should have rectified decision (yes) Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 020(2)ĭecision in written proceedings: cancellation of hearing following appellant's announcement of non-attendance Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(8) Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011 Method and system for controlling access of CSG in dual-connection architecture
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Registerīibliographic information is available in:
0 kommentar(er)
