T 0899/06 () of 26.8.2008

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T089906.20080826
Date of decision: 26 August 2008
Case number: T 0899/06
Application number: 01103395.8
IPC class: B23B 27/16
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 18.878K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Cutting insert and tool
Applicant name: Sandvik Intellectual Property AB
Opponent name: Iscar Ltd.
Board: 3.2.06
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 113(2)
Keywords: Request withdrawn - no approved text Art. 113(2) EPC 1973
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. In its interlocutory decision posted on 8 May 2006, the opposition division decided that European patent number 1 129 805 in its amended form met the requirements of the European Patent Convention.

II. The appellant (opponent) filed an appeal against the decision and requested revocation of the patent.

III. The proprietor (respondent) requested dismissal of the appeal or alternatively maintenance of the patent in an amended form based on the claims of one of its auxiliary requests.

IV. At the end of the oral proceedings of 26 August 2008, the respondent (proprietor) withdrew all its requests and did not approve any text for maintaining the patent.

The appellant confirmed its request for revocation of the patent.

Reasons for the Decision

No requests in the proceedings - Article 113(2) EPC 1973

Since the respondent withdrew all requests and did not approve any text for maintaining the patent, there is consequently no text in the proceedings which has been submitted to the European Patent Office (EPO), or agreed, by the proprietor, on which the EPO can take a decision regarding maintenance of the patent (Article 113(2) EPC 1973).

The patent must therefore be revoked.

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.

Quick Navigation