Übersetzung für "Unmittelbar und eindeutig" in Englisch

I would add that it must "give" it directly and unambiguously.

Thus, it is not directly and clearly possible any more to reconstruct the original photographic pictures.

However, this presupposed that the invention as claimed was directly and unambiguously disclosed in D1.

Public, pay-as-you-go financed pension schemes have become the focus of widespread concern because the impact of ageing on these schemes is very direct and clear, whereas in the case of funded schemes the impact will be much more difficult to predict.

Thus, uncontrolled over excitation effects in the individual amplification stages within the total chain can no longer occur since now always the last stage of a chain first delimits the signal so that an over excitation can be directly and unequivocally determined by the operator.

Thus, uncontrolled over excitation effects in the individual amplification stages within the total chain can no longer occur since now always the last stage of a chain first delimits the signal so that an over excitation can be directly and unequivocally determined by the operator.

If a whole is reduced by an undisclosed first part, the present board fails to see how the remaining second part could ever be regarded as explicitly or implicitly, but directly and unambiguously, disclosed in the application as filed.

Such a correction could therefore be made only within the limits of what a skilled person would derive directly and unambiguously, using common general knowledge and seen objectively and relative to the date of filing, from the whole of the documents forming the content of the European patent application (referring to G 3/89).

It is the view of the Board that if an entity itself is disclosed to the skilled person, this does not necessarily mean that a component part is also disclosed for the purpose of priority if this cannot be envisaged directly and unambiguously as such, and requires considerable investigation to reveal its identity.

This means direct and unambiguous derivability from and no contradiction to the totality of the original disclosure.

In assessing whether the prior art as set out in a citation rendered the claimed solution obvious to the skilled person, account had to be taken not only of what he would gather directly and unambiguously from the citation but equally of what he could deduce from it using his specialist knowledge.

Therefore, the claimed combination is not directly and unambiguously derivable from the disclosure of document (30) relied upon by the Respondents.

In accordance with established board case law, the relevant question to be decided in assessing whether an amendment adds subject-matter extending beyond the content of the application as filed or (in the case of divisional applications) the parent application as filed is whether the proposed amendments were directly and unambiguously derivable from the application as filed or from the parent application as filed.

This means direct and unambiguous derivability from and no contradiction to the totality of the original disclosure (cf. Point 2.7 of the Reasons).

Generalising a value range taken from an example was allowed, but such intermediate generalisation was admissible under Art.123(2) EPC only if the skilled person could unmistakably ascertain from the application as filed that this feature was not closely related to the example's other features but rather applied directly and unambiguously in the more general context.

To anticipate the claimed feature, it should have been directly and unambiguously derivable that one should not introduce the second capsule, but actuate piston (2) independently and swiftly as soon as handle (7) liberates the capsule.

The proviso laid down in G 2/98 (supra, Reasons, point 6.7) must be seen as an expression of the requirement for a direct and unambiguous disclosure in the priority document of the subject-matter of the claim of the subsequent application.

It followed that the claimed subject-matter in all requests could not be directly and unambiguously derived from the application as filed.

The board decided that, in spite of a certain probability in favour of the appellant/patentee's position, the amendment was not allowable because there were various known methods for calculating this value, not all leading to identical results, and the application did not directly and unambiguously disclose which method had to be used.

Therefore, irrespective of its context, the amendment can only be made within the limits of what is objectively derivable from the whole of the application documents as filed, which means what a skilled person would derive from them directly and unambiguously, using common general knowledge relative to the date of filing.

The test for additional subject-matter corresponded to the test for novelty only in so far as both required assessment of whether or not information was directly and unambiguously derivable from that previously presented in the originally filed application or in a prior document respectively.

In the case at issue, the subject-matter remaining in claims 1 and 5 of the auxiliary request after the introduction of the disclaimer, namely a method for obtaining polypeptide-secreting cells which included the culture of human embryonic stem (hES) cells derived only and exclusively from non-destructive methods, was not available at the priority date of the application (7December 2001) and thus was not directly and unambiguously disclosed to a skilled person as required by decision G2/10.

In the end, the board held that, in the absence of such a reference to the use of the specific wash fluid defined in claim 9 as filed to remove COS selectively, the skilled person could not derive the new combination of features directly and unambiguously from the application as filed.

That is to say, for the priority date to be valid in this respect the subject-matter of the claim must be directly and unambiguously derivable from the disclosure of the invention in the priority document, also taking into account any features implicit to a person skilled in the art in what is expressly mentioned in the document (seeG 2/98).

In accordance with the established jurisprudence of the Boards of Appeal, the relevant question to be decided in assessing whether an amendment adds subject-matter extending beyond the content of the application as filed, is whether the proposed amendments were directly and unambiguously derivable from the application as filed.

These circumstances were then also taken into account by the board in its assessment of whether this shape was directly and unambiguously derivable from the parent application.

Owing to this particular definition of the problem, the skilled person directly and unambiguously understood that the above-mentioned features did not contribute to the solution of the problem, and thus were not necessary for the definition of the invention.

This meant direct and unambiguous derivability from and no contradiction of the totality of the original disclosure (same reasoning followed in T 527/88 and T 685/90).

As already indicated, answers to the referred questions cannot be found directly and unambiguously by reference to the provisions of the EPC.

An amendment was unallowable if the overall change in content of the application, whether by way of addition, alteration or excision, resulted in the skilled person being presented with information not directly and unambiguously derivable from that previously presented by the application.