Posts tagged with: "Enlarged-Board-of-Appeal"
Results 161 - 180
of 1,196
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Sep 2013, 1:36 am
The EPO, in particular its Boards and Enlarged Board of Appeal, is currently greatly exercised on matters of vegetation. [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 5:01 pm
This case law has been confirmed by the Enlarged Board of appeal in its decision G 3/03. [read post]
27 Apr 2016, 9:55 am
One or two external members of the Enlarged Board are included in the panel in cases where there is a referral to the Enlarged Board by an EPO Board of Appeal or the EPO President, and the scope of the matter extends beyond the internal administration of the EPO. [read post]
28 Nov 2024, 5:58 am
At the end of the oral proceedings the Chairman stated that the Board intended to refer a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal. [read post]
22 Dec 2023, 5:29 am
The topic of prior use has been elevated to the status of a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (G1/23). [read post]
3 Sep 2018, 2:57 am
In G 1/86, the Enlarged Board had weighed up the (side) effects on the various parties involved. [read post]
29 Sep 2010, 3:01 pm
The Enlarged Board of appeal (EBA) has spoken again! [read post]
21 Sep 2021, 12:26 am
As recently reported here on IPKat, we are imminently expecting a referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) on the issue of using post-filed data to support plausibility for inventive step. [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 8:03 am
At the hearing, the Board of Appeal deemed it unnecessary to refer the issue of priority to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA). [read post]
28 May 2021, 7:13 am
The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) has decided to reschedule oral proceedings for G1/21 due to a procedural technicality. [read post]
20 Feb 2019, 2:01 am
The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA)'s interpretation of the Articles is binding on Board of Appeals (BA), unless the BA has reason to refer the issue again to the EBA. [read post]
7 Jan 2015, 12:34 am
Merpel is very grateful indeed to a correspondent who provided the following analysis.This fascinating document is issued at the beginning of every year by the Enlarged Presidium of the Boards of Appeal* and is a plan which essentially sets out which cases, according to their international classification, are to be handled by which Technical Board of Appeal. [read post]
2 Feb 2021, 1:37 am
Pursuant to Article 111(1) EPC:Following the examination as to the allowability of the appeal, the Board of Appeal shall decide on the appeal. [read post]
3 Jul 2023, 9:25 am
Rose Hughes commented on the new referral (T0438/19) to the Enlarged Board of Appeal in relation to the fact that the same seeks clarification on the enablement test for prior use of a product. [read post]
29 Apr 2009, 10:00 am
The final date for filing observations (or amicus curiae briefs, if you prefer) on the EPO President's referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is 30 April 2009. [read post]
23 Feb 2022, 12:30 am
At the tail end of last year, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) reached its decision in G 1/21 on the legality of mandatory video conferencing (ViCo) oral proceedings. [read post]
1 May 2020, 8:29 pm
The CAFC vacated the decision of PTAB:Grit Energy Solutions, LLC (“Grit Energy”) appeals thedecision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) inan inter partes review of claims 1–7 of U.S. [read post]
31 Mar 2019, 1:41 am
In this case, the Board referred questions to the Enlarged Board about the applicability of the gold standard disclosure test as defined in decision G 2/10 to undisclosed disclaimers (no), and the applicability of criteria as defined in decisions G 1/03 and G 2/03 (yes). [read post]
28 Oct 2013, 6:01 pm
A kind colleague has informed me that Board 3.3.01 has now issued its final decision in case T 584/09.In this case the opponent filed an appeal after the Opposition Division had maintained the patent in amended form.In its first decision, dated February 3, 2011, Board 3.3.01 revoked the patent.The Enlarged Board of appeal (EBA), in its decision R 21/11, set aside the decision because the deciding Board had not been aware of a request (to… [read post]
21 Aug 2017, 11:20 pm
Overview of the present decision2.1 The clarity objections in the first instance decision (18.1-18.2) are unjustified.2.2 The board does not remit the case to the department of first instance (Article 111(1) EPC 1973).2.3 Claim 1 of all requests lacks an inventive step (Article 56 EPC 1973).2.4 The board does not refer either of the two questions submitted by the appellant to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (Article 112(1)(a) EPC 1973).3. [read post]
