T 0482/02 (Program Guide/UNITED VIDEO PROPERTIES) of 09.02.2005
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2005:T048202.20050209
- Date of decision
- 9 February 2005
- Case number
- T 0482/02
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 96911607.8
- IPC class
- H04N 5/445H04N 5/50
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen and members (B)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- T 0482/02 Program guide/UNITED VIDEO PROPERTIES 2005-12-13
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Interactive program guide systems and processes
- Applicant name
- United Video Properties, Inc.
- Opponent name
- Interessengemeinschaft für Rundfunkschutzrechte GmbH
Schutzrechtsverwertung & Co. KG - Board
- 3.5.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 104 1973European Patent Convention Art 58 1973European Patent Convention Art 99 1973European Patent Convention R 100(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 55(a) 1973European Patent Convention R 56(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 56(2) 1973
- Keywords
- Admissibility of opposition (no)
UK Partnership - Catchword
- In accordance with decision G 3/99, where it is doubtful whether an opposition is filed on behalf of a body which enjoys legal personality in its own right or on behalf of several natural persons acting in common, the opponents (here a UK partnership) should be invited to establish that the body is a legal person or an equivalent thereto. If this is not established, the opposition is to be considered as having been filed on behalf of the several natural persons as common opponents. In that case the opponents still have to furnish the names and addresses of the partners in order to comply with Rule 55, sub-paragraph (a) EPC. If this information is not received within a period specified by the Board, the opposition must be rejected as inadmissible under Rule 56(2) EPC, irrespective of whether or not such information would have been sufficient to prevent rejection under Rule 56(1) EPC.
- Cited cases
- G 0003/99
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. Insofar as relating to the admissibility of the opposition filed by respondents 02, the decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The opposition filed by respondents 02 is rejected as inadmissible.