The Technical Board of Appeal ruled that a claim of an opposed patent was anticipated by the publication of a divisional of that same patent. Because the claim contained an intermediate generalization with respect to the priority document, the claim was not entitled to priority. The divisional was however entitled to claim priority for the description of an embodiment that fell under the claim, and was therefore damaging for the novelty of the patent.
Click here for the full text of this case.
A summary of this case will be posted on http://www.KluwerIPCases.com
________________________
To make sure you do not miss out on regular updates from the Kluwer Patent Blog, please subscribe here.
