European Patent Office

T 1052/20 vom 23.02.2022

Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
ECLI:EP:BA:2022:T105220.20220223
Datum der Entscheidung
23. Februar 2022
Aktenzeichen
T 1052/20
Antrag auf Überprüfung von
-
Anmeldenummer
12862132.3
Verfahrenssprache
Englisch
Verteilung
Nicht verteilt (D)
Amtsblattfassungen
Keine AB-Links gefunden
Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
-
Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
-
Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
APPARATUSES FOR CUTTING FOOD PRODUCTS
Name des Antragstellers
URSCHEL LABORATORIES, INC.
Frito-Lay North America, Inc.
Name des Einsprechenden
FAM
Kammer
3.2.07
Leitsatz
-
Relevante Rechtsnormen
European Patent Convention Art 104(1)European Patent Convention Art 108European Patent Convention Art 111(1)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)European Patent Convention Art 83European Patent Convention R 99(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(1)(a)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(3)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(6)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 016(1)
Schlagwörter
Admissibility of appeal - appeal sufficiently substantiated (yes)
Admissibility of appeal - directed to requests on which the decision under appeal was based (yes)
Sufficiency of disclosure - (yes)
Amendments - extension beyond the content of the application as filed (no)
Amendments - added subject-matter (no)
Amendments - allowable (yes)
Amendment after summons - objection
Amendment after summons - cogent reasons (no)
Amendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (no)
Amendment after summons - taken into account (no)
Remittal - special reasons for remittal
Remittal - (yes)
Apportionment of costs - (no)
Orientierungssatz
-
Zitierende Akten
-

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The case is remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution.

3. The request for apportionment of costs is refused.