Exceptional circumstances, Article 13(2) RPBA , sufficiency of disclosure
Chinese patent office follows JPTO, USPTO, CIPO, INPI (Brazil) and KIPO with which INPI already has a PPH agreement
Standard of proof for assessment of novelty
Priority claim, Article 54(3) EPC, disclaimer
The applicant's (appellant's) appeal is against the examining division's decision to refuse European patent application No. 16 751 065.0.
The examining division came to the conclusion that the…
Appeals were filed against the interlocutory decision of the opposition division that patent 2140867 as amended met the requirements of the EPC.
Claim 1 as maintained relates to:
"A pharmaceutical…
The patent proprietor filed an appeal against the opposition division's decision to revoke the patent because the invention was not disclosed in a manner sufficiently clear and complete for it to be…
The appeal of the opponent (hereinafter appellant) lies from the decision of the opposition division according to which the opposition against European patent 2 600 713 was rejected.
According to the…
The opposition division decided that European patent 2 627 318 as amended in accordance with auxiliary request 2 met the requirements of the EPC. The patent proprietor and the opponent filed appeals.…
The patent proprietor's (appellant's) appeal lies from the opposition division's decision to revoke European patent No. 1 901 842 B1.
The board does not find that the opposition division conducted…
