European Patent Office

T 1732/10 vom 19.12.2013

Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
ECLI:EP:BA:2013:T173210.20131219
Datum der Entscheidung
19. Dezember 2013
Aktenzeichen
T 1732/10
Antrag auf Überprüfung von
-
Anmeldenummer
03738853.5
Verfahrenssprache
Englisch
Verteilung
An die Kammervorsitzenden und -mitglieder verteilt (B)
Amtsblattfassungen
Keine AB-Links gefunden
Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
-
Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
-
Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
DEVICE FOR THE APPLICATION OF A FLUID
Name des Antragstellers
Eftec Europe Holding AG
Name des Einsprechenden
ABB PATENT GmbH
Dürr Systems GmbH
Kammer
3.2.07
Leitsatz
-
Relevante Rechtsnormen
Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(1)(b)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(3)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(6)
Schlagwörter
Late-filed main and auxiliary requests 1 to 10 - not admitted
Reinstating a withdrawn request as late as at the oral proceedings-late amendment of the case, not admitted
Orientierungssatz
Not reacting in substance to the appeal of the opponent, but waiting for the Board's preliminary opinion before any substantive reaction is filed, is regarded as an abuse of procedure. It is contrary to the equal distribution of rights and obligations upon both sides in inter-partes proceedings and to the principle that both sides should set out their complete case at the outset of the proceedings. Both principles are clearly established by the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal.
This is all the more so if the substantiation for all the requests, which were filed after summons to oral proceedings have been sent, is filed only shortly before the oral proceedings before the Board. Such requests – which are not self-explanatory - are considered by the Board as submitted only on the date of their substantiation. Such very late requests are contrary to procedural economy, do not take account of the state of the proceedings and cannot be reasonably dealt with by the Board without adjournment of the proceedings or remittal to the department of first instance, contrary to Article 13(1) and 13(3) RPBA.
Where such very late requests take up subject-matter only available from the description, it cannot automatically be assumed that it was covered by the initial search, nor that it is automatically the responsibility of the opponent to perform such a search (see points 1.1 to 1.8).
Zitierte Akten
T 0888/02T 1621/09

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.