G 0002/04 (Transfer of opposition/HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE) vom 25.05.2005

Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator: ECLI:EP:BA:2005:G000204.20050525
Datum der Entscheidung: 25. Mai 2005
Aktenzeichen: G 0002/04
Antrag auf Überprüfung von: T 1091/02 2004-07-23
Anmeldenummer: 92305862.2
IPC-Klasse: C12Q 1/68
Verfahrenssprache: Englisch
Verteilung: Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
Download: Entscheidung auf Englisch
Amtsblattfassungen: Deutsch
Englisch
Französisch
Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte: -
Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung: -
Bezeichnung der Anmeldung: Methods for detection of carcinoma metastases by nucleic acid amplification
Name des Antragstellers: F. HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE AG, et al.
Name des Einsprechenden: (1) Akzo Nobel N.V.
(2) Vysis Inc.
Kammer: -
Leitsatz: (see Order)
Relevante Rechtsnormen: European Patent Convention Art 105 1973 European Patent Convention Art 107 1973 European Patent Convention Art 108 1973 European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 114(2) 1973 European Patent Convention Art 134 1973 European Patent Convention Art 58 1973 European Patent Convention Art 99(1) 1973 European Patent Convention R 101(1) 1973 European Patent Convention R 101(4) 1973 European Patent Convention R 20 1973 European Patent Convention R 60(2) 1973 European Patent Convention R 61 1973 European Patent Convention R 64(a) 1973 European Patent Convention R 65(2) 1973 European Patent Convention R 88 1973
Schlagwörter: Admissibility of the referral (yes)
Transfer of opponent status - free transfer (no) - transfer to subsidiary in whose interest the opposition was filed (no)
Correction of the appellant contrary to true intentions (no)
Auxiliary request concerning the person of the appellant in case of legal uncertainty
Orientierungssatz: -
Zitierte Akten: G 0004/88 G 0009/91 G 0010/91 G 0008/92 G 0009/93 G 0001/97 G 0003/97 G 0003/99 J 0016/94 J 0027/94 T 0563/89 T 0659/92 T 0670/95 T 0298/97 T 0097/98 T 0964/98 T 0711/99 T 0009/00 T 0715/01 T 0854/02
Zitierende Akten: G 0001/12 G 0001/13 G 0002/19 G 0001/22 G 0002/22 J 0037/03 J 0038/03 J 0017/12 T 0147/00 T 0416/00 T 1071/00 T 0136/01 T 0561/01 T 1086/02 T 1091/02 T 0207/03 T 0293/03 T 0345/03 T 0503/03 T 0956/03 T 1178/04 T 0006/05 T 0108/05 T 0659/05 T 0675/05 T 0677/05 T 0724/05 T 1421/05 T 0426/06 T 0875/06 T 1081/06 T 1206/06 T 1324/06 T 0391/07 T 0500/07 T 0993/07 T 1668/07 T 1697/07 T 0384/08 T 0445/08 T 0737/08 T 0960/08 T 1588/08 T 1790/08 T 1877/08 T 1145/09 T 1284/09 T 1938/09 T 1982/09 T 0128/10 T 0284/10 T 0518/10 T 1032/10 T 0184/11 T 0577/11 T 2136/11 T 0545/12 T 0796/12 T 0854/12 T 1138/12 T 2016/12 T 2357/12 T 1729/13 T 0615/14 T 0194/15 T 0219/15 T 0660/15 T 1001/15 T 1068/15 T 1415/16 T 2136/16 T 2707/16 T 0007/17 T 1493/17 T 0488/18 T 2212/18 T 2941/18 T 1012/19 T 2241/19 T 3273/19 T 1531/21 T 1029/23 T 1127/23 T 1286/23

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The questions referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal are answered as follows:

I. (a) The status as an opponent cannot be freely transferred.

(b) A legal person who was a subsidiary of the opponent when the opposition was filed and who carries on the business to which the opposed patent relates cannot acquire the status as opponent if all its shares are assigned to another company.

II. If, when filing an appeal, there is a justifiable legal uncertainty as to how the law is to be interpreted in respect of the question of who the correct party to the proceedings is, it is legitimate that the appeal is filed in the name of the person whom the person acting considers, according to his interpretation, to be the correct party, and at the same time, as an auxiliary request, in the name of a different person who might, according to another possible interpretation, also be considered the correct party to the proceedings.