Gepubliceerd op woensdag 4 november 2015
Vragen aan Grote Kamer EOB over partial en poisonous priorities
Vragen aan Grote Kamer van Beroep 17 juli 2015, IEFbe 1565; T-557/13; G-1/15 (Poisonous en Partial priorities)
Octrooirecht. Poisonous en partial priorities. Derden kunnen tot 1 maart 2016 written statements indienen. EOB President besluit, vanwege de mogelijke impact van de beslissing, dat alle proceedings bij de EOB en de oppositiedevisies die geheel steunen op de uitkomst worden opgeschort (ex officio) tot de Grote Kamer van Beroep antwoord geeft op de volgende vragen (G-1/15):
1. Where a claim of a European patent application or patent encompasses alternative subject-matters by virtue of one or more generic expressions or otherwise (generic "OR"-claim), may entitlement to partial priority be refused under the EPC for that claim in respect of alternative subject-matter disclosed (in an enabling manner) for the first time, directly, or at least implicitly, and unambiguously, in the priority document?
2. If the answer is yes, subject to certain conditions, is the proviso "provided that it gives rise to the claiming of a limited number of clearly defined alternative subject-matters" in point 6.7 of G 2/98 to be taken as the legal test for assessing entitlement to partial priority for a generic "OR"-claim?
3. If the answer to question 2 is yes, how are the criteria "limited number" and "clearly defined alternative subject- matters" to be interpreted and applied?
4. If the answer to question 2 is no, how is entitlement to partial priority to be assessed for a generic "OR"-claim?
5. If an affirmative answer is given to question 1, may subject-matter disclosed in a parent or divisional application of a European patent application be cited as state of the art under Article 54(3) EPC against subject-matter disclosed in the priority document and encompassed as an alternative in a generic "OR"-claim of the said European patent application or of the patent granted thereon?
Op andere blogs:
IP Kat