Journal Article

Inventive step (alternative formulation of problem) and ‘old’ closest prior art: whether to admit an auxiliary request filed at the end of the oral proceedings

David Rogers

in Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice

Volume 2, issue 4, pages 210-211
Published in print April 2007 | ISSN: 1747-1532
Published online April 2007 | e-ISSN: 1747-1540 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpm021
Inventive step (alternative formulation of problem) and ‘old’ closest prior art: whether to admit an auxiliary request filed at the end of the oral proceedings

Show Summary Details

Preview

The case law on the circumstances when a patent applicant or patentee may reformulate the technical problem to be solved as set out in the description when considering inventive step is reviewed. The decision also looks at how the Board exercises its discretion under Article 10b Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (‘RPBA’) on whether to admit an auxiliary request filed for the first time at the oral proceedings.

Journal Article.  1247 words. 

Subjects: Intellectual Property Law

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.