T 1421/05 vom 18.01.2011
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T142105.20110118
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 18. Januar 2011
- Aktenzeichen
- T 1421/05
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 91903945.3
- IPC-Klasse
- A23L 1/054
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- An die Kammervorsitzenden und -mitglieder verteilt (B)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Keine AB-Links gefunden
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- Docosahexaenoic acid, methods for its production and compounds containing the same
- Name des Antragstellers
- MARTEK BIOSCIENCES CORPORATION
- Name des Einsprechenden
- OmegaTech, Inc.
Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH
Monsanto Company
Nagase Biochemicals, Ltd. - Kammer
- 3.3.09
- Leitsatz
1. Where the business assets in relation to which an opposition was filed have been transferred and at the same time the transferor has contractually agreed to transfer the opposition to the transferee, the status of opponent remains with the transferor in the absence of there being filed with the Office (a) evidence sufficiently evidencing the transfer and (b) a request to recognise the transfer of opponent status (point 3.3).
2. Where in such a case the transferor subsequently ceases to exist but has a universal successor, the status of opponent is capable of passing to that successor (point 4.7).
3. The mere possibility of abuse (in the sense of G 3/97) arising out of such events does not prevent opponent status passing in this way; it is for the proprietor to prove relevant acts of abuse (point 5).
4. An appeal filed by mistake in the name of an opponent who no longer exists but who has a universal successor, and which was obviously intended to be filed on behalf of the person who is the actual opponent and who was prejudiced by the decision, namely the universal successor, is admissible; if necessary the notice of appeal and statement of grounds of appeal may be corrected to record the name of the true appellant/opponent (points 6 and 7).
5. It is not in accordance with normal procedural efficiency and principles of fairness to allow a party to re-open questions relating to the formal allowability of a claim and to attempt to raise a new issue which it had had the opportunity to raise and which it should have raised at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and in doing so to resile from its previous position (point 13.11).
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 112(2)European Patent Convention Art 114(2)European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention Art 83European Patent Convention Art 84European Patent Convention R 101(7) 1973European Patent Convention R 26(2)(c) 1973European Patent Convention R 64(a) 1973European Patent Convention R 65(2) 1973European Patent Convention R 88 1973European Patent Convention R 90(1)(a) 1973Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)
- Schlagwörter
- Inter-partes transfer of opposition (no)
Transfer of opposition status to universal successor (yes)
Correction of name of appellant (yes)
Admissibility of appeal (yes)
Party entitled to resile from position previously taken in opposition proceedings (no)
Issue decided in first appeal res judicata (yes)
Amendments of party's case in appeal proceedings (no)
Inventive step (yes) - Orientierungssatz
- -
- Zitierte Akten
- G 0004/88G 0009/91G 0010/91G 0003/97G 0002/04T 0234/86T 0301/87T 0934/91T 0951/91T 0201/92T 0525/94T 0353/95T 0670/95T 0019/97T 0298/97T 1137/97T 1204/97T 0097/98T 0656/98T 0814/98T 0460/99T 0952/99T 0446/00T 1091/00T 0015/01T 0136/01T 0520/01T 0715/01T 0413/02T 0956/03T 0006/05T 0425/05T 0724/05T 1324/06T 0157/07T 0762/07
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The appeal is accepted as admissible.
2. The name of the Appellant is ordered to be corrected to "Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH".
3. The appeal is dismissed.