Quick Navigation:
Home Page [Alt] + 0 |
Content [Alt] + 1 |
Search [Alt] + 7 |
Sitemap [Alt] + 8 |
Help [Alt] + 9
Sub Navigation
Main Content
EPO boards of appeal decision
Date of decision: 14 December 2007
Case number: T 1704/06 - 3.5.01
Application number: 99964344.8
IPC class: G06F17/60, A63F5/00
Proceedings language: EN
| Title of the application Methods of paying winning bets |
|
| Applicant name Rudd, Clarence Ernest |
|
| Opponent name - |
|
| Headnote - |
|
| Articles and rules EPC Art 56 EPC Art 113(1) EPC Art 123(2) |
|
| Keywords - | |
| Cited decisions T 0599/93 T 0258/03 T 0602/03 T 0198/06 | |
| Catchwords In the situation where an appellant submits new claims after oral proceedings have been arranged but does not attend these proceedings, a board can refuse the new claims for substantive reasons, specifically lack of inventive step, even if the claims have not been discussed before and were filed in good time before the oral proceedings. This will in particular be the case if an examination of these substantive requirements is to be expected in the light of the prevailing legal and factual situation (point 7.6 of the reasons). |
