Observe the different terms (for example. B „after the EPO judgment”) which gives the EPO a wide margin of appreciation in determining whether you should offer de minimis comparisons. Also note the absence of „all appropriate investigations” and certain other conditions for the status of an innocent land owner as a defense by third parties. Despite this, the EPO guidelines also require all appropriate studies for the de minimis comparison. (17) The guide contains a two-step argument. First, it is alleged that the de minimis condition of the CERCLA comparison, according to which the landowner lacks „constructive knowledge”, is similar to the language „having no reason to know” in the cercla provision „An innocent landowner as a defence”. Second, since „had no reason to know” requires all appropriate studies, one must read the condition to address the lack of constructive knowledge to do the same. . . .

イージー ブースト 偽物 通販