EPO Case Law Week 18

Noteworthy decisions of week 18 (published 27.4 - 1.5.2015)

T 2579/11 - In case the prior art contains an application and in the file thereof, the priority document, and some examples included only in the priority document are closer to the claim at issue, these examples in the priority document can form the closest prior art, even if the subsequent application has a generally more detailed description.

T1883/12 - (1) Limited review of discretion of OD to not admit any prior art submitted after opposition period. (2) Opponent had submitted a document before OD without using it in an attack, and had only based arguments on it in appeal. This amounted to a fresh case, according the Board, and the arguments are not admitted.

T 0840/11 - The patent was revoked for essentially correct reasons. Board 3.3.05 admitted an appeal based on a new claim request overcoming the reasons by amendment. The Board distinguishes from T2532/11 by noting that "the statement of grounds of appeal contains a detailed discussion [...] of why the independent claims of the amended requests in the appellant's opinion overcome the objection of added subject-matter."

T 0423/11 - (1) Appeal filed by "the opponent" without giving name of appellant is admissible, because there was no doubt about identity of appellant. (2) Transfer of opposition registered 8 years after transfer business assets. (3) Acts performed by opponent in meantime are valid since transfer only has effect as of the date filing the request.

T 0500/12 - The Board applies R84(1) EPC in appeal: the appeal of the opponent is continued at his request, even while patentee stated that the patent had been surrendered or lapsed in all States.