14-15 November 2018
|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T062508.20110525|
|Date of decision:||25 May 2011|
|Case number:||T 0625/08|
|IPC class:||A61K 31/66|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Anhydrous alendronate monosodium salt formulations and their use for the treatment of bone diseases|
|Applicant name:||Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.|
|Opponent name:||Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. European patent nº EP 833643 based on EP application nº 96920607.7 filed on 3 June 1996 was granted to Merck & Co., Inc. (NJ, USA). This corporate changed its name to Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (see letters dated 11 December 2009 and 26 January 2010).
II. Notice of opposition was filed on 15 November 2005 by Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. (GB).
By decision posted on 22 February 2008 and deemed notified on 3 March 2008, the opposition division maintained the patent in amended form.
III. On 29 March 2008 the opponent filed an appeal against said decision, paid the appeal fee on the same day. The corresponding statement setting out the grounds of appeal were filed on 30 June 2008.
The appellant requested that the impugned decision be set aside and the patent revoked.
IV. The respondent (patentee) filed on 14 November 2008 its reply to the grounds of appeal and requested that it be dismissed.
V. A communication accompanying the summons to the oral proceedings to be held on 29 June 2011 was sent to the parties pursuant to Article 15(1) RPBA on 30 March 2011.
VI. With letter dated 6 May 2011 the proprietor of the patent informed the Board of Appeal that it no longer approves the text of any of the requests on file and that it believed that this brings the appeal to a close and obviates the need for oral proceedings.
Reasons for the decision
1. Under Article 113(2) EPC the European Patent Office shall examine and decide upon the European patent application or the European patent only in the text submitted to it, or agreed by the applicant or the proprietor of the patent.
2. With its letter dated 6 May 2011 the proprietor of European patent nº 0833643 informed the present Board of Appeal that it no longer approves the text of any of its requests on file.
Under these circumstances the decision under appeal has to be set aside and the patent revoked.
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The patent is revoked.