1. According to the EPC, the right to object to a member of a Board of Appeal or of the Enlarged Board of Appeal is reserved to the party to the proceedings who suspects partiality in such a member…
Following decision G 1/03, the Board concluded that a disclaimer that is used to remove subject-matter falling under the prohibition of Article 53(a) EPC in combination with Rule 28(c) EPC, is…
The Examining Division had refused a patent application for a method and system of processing a payment card transaction. Before the Board of Appeal, the applicant requested suspension of the…
The Board of Appeal decided that the following applies as regards to sufficiency of disclosure: (1) the skilled person should be able to realise without undue burden substantially any embodiment…
The selection of explicitly disclosed borderline values defining several (sub)ranges, in order to form a new (narrower) subrange, is not contestable under Article 123 (2) EPC when the ranges belong…
In the case at hand, Olympus filed a petition for review against the decision of the Board of Appeal to revoke Olympus' patent. Olympus argued that it had had no opportunity to comment on the grounds…
This case concerns a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal regarding the interpretation of the term ‘pending application’ in the wording of Rule 25(1) EPC 1973. In the appealed decision from the…
During appeal proceedings, the appellant argued lack of inventive step on the basis of public prior use of a composition for making the claimed product. The prior use appeared to relate to an…
The claims of the patent in suit related to a memory for sensing sub-groups of memory cells that required the activation of word line segments and corresponding sets of sense amplifiers in…
