|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2017:T162512.20171027|
|Date of decision:||27 October 2017|
|Case number:||T 1625/12|
|IPC class:||C07K 16/24
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Pegylated single domain antibodies (dAb)|
|Applicant name:||Domantis Limited|
|Opponent name:||Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH/
Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co.KG
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Lapse of patent in all designated states - continuation of appeal proceedings (no)|
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. Appeals were lodged by both opponents against the interlocutory decision of the opposition division maintaining European patent No. 1 639 011 (the patent in suit) in amended form.
II. With a letter dated 18 September 2014, appellant I (opponent 01) withdrew its appeal.
III. By a communication dated 16 October 2017, the board informed the parties that it was apparent from the entries in the European Patent Register that the patent in suit had been surrendered or had lapsed with effect for all the designated Contracting States in the course of the appeal proceedings and invited the appellant (opponent 02), within two months from notification of the communication, whether it requested continuation of the appeal proceedings.
IV. With a submission dated 23 October 2017, the appellant informed the board that it did not request continuation of the appeal proceedings.
Reasons for the Decision
1. The appeal is admissible.
2. Rule 84(1) EPC provides that if "the European patent has been surrendered in all the designated Contracting States or has lapsed in all those States, the opposition proceedings may be continued at the request of the opponent filed within two months of a communication from the European Patent Office informing him of the surrender or lapse". Based on Rule 100(1) EPC, Rule 84(1) EPC applies mutatis mutandis in opposition appeal proceedings, i.e. the appeal proceedings may be continued at the request of the appellant-opponent.
3. As the appellant has explicitly indicated that it does not request a continuation of the appeal proceedings (see section IV, supra) the appeal-proceedings are to be terminated.
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal proceedings are terminated.