T 2516/19 (CRISPR/THE BROAD INSTITUTE, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE) of 05.03.2024
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2024:T251619.20240305
- Date of decision
- 5 March 2024
- Case number
- T 2516/19
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 15154539.9
- IPC class
- C12N 15/63
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- No distribution (D)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Engineering of systems, methods and optimized guide compositions for sequence manipulation
- Applicant name
- The Broad Institute, Inc.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
President and Fellows of Harvard College - Opponent name
- Boxall Intellectual Property Management Limited
CRISPR Therapeutics AG
Grund, Dr., Martin
Wächtershäuser & Hartz
Patentanwaltspartnerschaft mbB/
Blodig, Wolfgang
Sagittarius Intellectual Property LLP
Schlich, George
Storz, Dr. Ulrich
Jones Day - Board
- 3.3.08
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 111(1)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 87European Patent Convention Art 88European Patent Convention Art 89Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013
- Keywords
- Entitlement to priority - (yes)
Remittal to first instance
Remittal - (yes)
Referral of questions to the EBoA - (no)
Admission of late filed documents and arguments - (yes) - Catchword
- Presumption of priority
- Cited cases
- G 0001/84G 0005/88G 0009/93G 0004/98G 0002/07G 0002/08G 0003/19G 0001/22J 0008/00T 0390/90T 0015/01T 1242/04T 0577/11T 1201/14T 1919/17T 0521/18T 0844/18T 1913/19T 2719/19T 1006/21T 1946/21
- Citing cases
- T 0098/23
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The requests for referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal
are refused.
2. The decision under appeal is set aside.
3. The case is remitted to the Opposition Division for further
prosecution.