T 2091/12 - Changing a fresh ground to an old ground
Some fresh ground coffee |
With its appeal, the opponent filed a new novelty attack based on prior use. He also filed evidence supporting the prior use allegation.
Novelty was not a ground of opposition in first instance. In the summons, the board notes that it is thus a fresh ground of opposition. As the proprietor did not agree to having it introduced in the proceedings, the fate of this new attack seems ensured.
However, in his written submissions the opponent files an inventive step attack based on prior use, and supported by the evidence he filed with his statement of grounds. Alas, by this time the board considers it too late in the appeal proceedings, and does not admit the new attack.