Conclusion
85.Neither the conditional nor unconditional applications to amend the specification and claims of the Patent are allowable since the amendments would result in the specification disclosing additional matter within the meaning of s.76(3(a) of the Act and the amended claims would lack clarity contrary to s.14(5)(b). Had the amendments been lawful, the amended claims would have been novel and would have contained an inventive step. 86.The applications to amend the Patent are dismissed. The Patent stands to be revoked.
- Introduction
- The Patent
- characterized in that
- The issues
- The skilled person
- The claimed invention in more detail
- The parties’ arguments
- Discussion
- Added matter
- Clarity
- Novelty and inventive step
- Novelty of amended claim 9 in relation to Coslett
- Inventive step of amended claims 1 and 9 over Coslett
- Conclusion