1.2.2 Examples where file inspection was found not to be prejudicial to interests of appellant

In T 2254/08 the board decided that the inspection of documents that were marked confidential on filing but were publicly accessible on the internet was not prejudicial to the economic interests of the appellant (proprietor).

In T 1839/11 the board came to the conclusion that where a filed document contains information, some of which serves the purpose of informing the public about the patent but some of which does not, the filing of a version of the document in a form from which the latter information has been redacted may form the proper basis for an order excluding the unredacted document from file inspection under R. 144 EPC, the redacted version being open to file inspection.

In T 1150/13 the board agreed that details of the arrangement for providing instructions to a representative did not serve to inform the public about the application and that such information was not normally obtainable from a file. However, the board rejected the request for exclusion of a letter requesting the postponement of oral proceedings on the basis that the appellant had not argued why the publication of the letter would be prejudicial to its legitimate personal or economic interest, and the board did not consider that this would be the case.