T 0449/23 - (I) Resin blend E6300

Key points

• This decision contains many interesting points. In this post, something about commercially available products identified only by a tradename.
• "Example A of D5 [US 2004/0050704 A1] describes the preparation of an electrodeposition bath used to prepare electrodeposition coating compositions by mixing the following components (D5, paragraph [0044], table): - Resin blend E6300, "a resin blend available from PPG Industries, Inc.""
• "The sole matter of dispute was whether "resin blend E6300" of example A (D5, table in paragraph [0044]) is a resin emulsion (i) comprising an aminated resin (A) and a blocked isocyanate curing agent (B) as required by claim 1."
• "To the patent proprietor's advantage, it is assumed in the following that resin emulsion (i) with components (A) and (B) of claim 1 of the main request is not disclosed in example A of D5. More specifically, it is assumed that neither resin blend E6300 nor information pertaining to the nature thereof was made available to the public on the effective date of the patent."
• "the objective technical problem can only be formulated as proposed by the opponent, namely as the provision of an appropriate resin for the preparation of the cationic electrodeposition coating composition according to example A of D5."
• " The board agrees with the opponent that the solution to this problem is obvious in view of D5 alone. Specifically, paragraph [0023] of D5 discloses acid-solubilised reaction products of polyepoxides and primary or secondary amines as possible cationic electrodepositable resins, and states that these amine salt group-containing resins are usually used in combination with a blocked isocyanate curing agent. "
• "The subject-matter of claim 1 of the main request therefore lacks inventive step over D5."
• As a comment, and subject to G 1/23 (still pending at the time of writing): Is the example enabled? Should we treat Example A of D5 in this respect as a document or as a commercially available product? 
• If Resin blend E6300 is deemed to be enabled, is its composition disclosed? 
• In the case at hand, the dispute may also have been whether the commercial product met the definition of the resin emulsion in the claim and whether that was proven. 

EPO 

The link to the decision can be found after the jump.

https://www.epo.org/en/boards-of-appeal/decisions/t230449eu1