|
Date of decision
|
05 April 2000
|
|
|
Case number
|
T 0577/97
- 3.3.5
|
|
|
Application number
|
90908746.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title of the application
|
Catalytic destruction of organohalogen compounds
|
|
|
Applicant name
|
AlliedSignal Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keywords
Novelty - no, no new choice
Late filed evidence - admitted
New claims filed during oral proceedings - admitted
|
|
|
|
Catchwords:
|
|
There is no basis in the EPC to refuse auxiliary requests at
oral proceedings because of the circumstance that the new claims
are apparently "not clearly allowable". In contrast to the
situtation in examining proceedings, where Rule 86(3) EPC
requires that amendments after expiration of the time limit set
in the first communication of the EPO are subject to the consent
of the EPO, Rule 57a EPC does not contain such a requirement.
The discretion not to admit auxiliary requests should in
principle be limited to exceptional cases in which the filing of
the auxiliary request can be said to amount to an abuse of
procedural rights (point 3 of the reasons).
|
|
|
