EPO: New referrals to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

EPO: New referrals to the Enlarged Board of Appeal

Two issues have arisen recently causing the Technical Boards of Appeal to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA).

At oral proceedings on February 7 in respect of case T 318/14, the competent Board of Appeal referred questions relating to double patenting to the EBA. More specifically, the EBA is to consider if a European patent application can be refused if it claims the same subject matter as a European patent granted to the same applicant where the granted patent does not form part of the state of the art. In the affirmative, the EBA is further asked what the conditions would be for such a refusal, and if different conditions would have to be applied where the application is (a) filed on the same date as the already granted patent, or (b) a divisional of the parent, or (c) claims priority from that application upon which the parent was granted. Finally, in the case of point (c) above, the EBA is asked to consider if an applicant has a legitimate interest in the grant of the subsequent European patent application in view of the fact that the term of the patent is calculated on the basis of the filing date and not the priority date.

Further, by decision T 831/17 of February 25, an Appeal Board referred questions relating to (1) the right for oral proceedings, (2) a third party's possible right to appeal, and (3) the venue of oral proceedings in appeal. In relation to the third issue, in particular the EBA is to consider if the president or the Administrative Council of the EPO had the powers to move the Boards of Appeals' premises to Munich suburb Haar in 2017. In late 2016 the chairmen of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO adopted a resolution objecting to the relocation of the Boards of Appeal to Haar. At that time the issue appeared to be of a purely political nature, but now the matter is clearly becoming a legal one.

frederiksen-jakob-pade.jpg

Jakob Pade Frederiksen


Inspicos P/SKogle Allé 2DK-2970 HoersholmCopenhagen, DenmarkTel: +45 7070 2422Fax: +45 7070 2423info@inspicos.comwww.inspicos.com

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

CMS, which was told to respond to a cancellation action by February 12 but filed its response a day later, has rowed back on claims about an IT error
The deal could help Rouse gain a foothold in Australia and New Zealand for the first time
With a team of more than 80 patent lawyers and attorneys across 21 European offices, the firm is acting in some of the most high-profile UPC cases
Lippes Mathias has hired three partners and a counsel from Offit Kurman
External counsel for automotive companies explain how trends such as AI and vehicle connectivity are affecting their practices and reveal what their clients are prioritising
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The winners of the awards will be revealed at a gala dinner in New York City on April 25
Counsel debate the potential outcome of SCOTUS’s latest copyright case after justices questioned whether they should dismiss it
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP lawyer about their life and career
The small Düsseldorf firm is making a big impact in the UPC. Founding partner Christof Augenstein explains why
Gift this article