h) Trade names 

In T 2020/13, which concerned a catalyst composition and availability to the public of products defined by trade names, the board stated that where a technical term such as a trade name was known to have been abandoned between the filing or priority date and the publication date, this circumstance was to be taken into account in order to attribute to that technical term its proper meaning and to understand the technical teaching meant to be conveyed by that prior art document. The change of trade name did not render, in the circumstances of the case, the disclosure of example 6 of D1 unenabling. The board concluded that the nature of the catalysts behind the trade names was available to the public at the date of publication of D1 and that claim 1 lacked novelty.

On this issue in relation to Art. 83 EPC and its relationship to Art. 54 EPC, see T 842/14 (chemical composition of a product designated by a trademark).