T 0466/20 of 14.07.2021

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2021:T046620.20210714
Date of decision: 14 July 2021
Case number: T 0466/20
Petition for review of: -
Application number: 08001713.0
IPC class: G01N 15/14 G01N 15/12 G01N 33/49
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: Sample analyzer and computer program product
Applicant name: SYSMEX CORPORATION
Opponent name: Beckman Coulter, Inc.
Beckman Coulter GmbH
Board: 3.4.02
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions: European Patent Convention Art 10(1)European Patent Convention Art 10(2)(a)European Patent Convention Art 107 European Patent Convention Art 108 European Patent Convention Art 111(1)European Patent Convention Art 112(1)(a)European Patent Convention Art 113(1)European Patent Convention Art 114(1)European Patent Convention Art 116 European Patent Convention Art 117(1)(d)European Patent Convention Art 14(3)European Patent Convention Art 14(4)European Patent Convention Art 19(1)European Patent Convention Art 19(2)European Patent Convention R 102 European Patent Convention R 103(1)(a)European Patent Convention R 106 European Patent Convention R 111(1)European Patent Convention R 111(2)European Patent Convention R 113(1)European Patent Convention R 140 European Patent Convention R 3Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 011Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 012(5)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 020Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 021
Keywords: Admissibility of both appeals - (yes)
Objection under Rule 106 EPC - (dismissed)
Flaw in the decision under appeal - (yes) - change in the composition of the opposition division - written decision issued on behalf of an opposition division whose chairman was not present at the first oral proceedings and on the first day of the second oral proceedings
Remittal - (yes)
Remittal - fundamental deficiency in first-instance proceedings
Remittal to an opposition division in a different composition and under the responsibility of another Director of the opposition division
Remittal - (no)
Remittal to an opposition division in a different
composition - (no)
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no)
Reimbursement of both appeal fees - (yes)
Catchword: -
Cited cases: G 0005/91 G 0012/91 G 0008/95 G 0003/98 G 0002/99 G 0001/05 J 0005/81 J 0016/17 T 0244/85 T 0271/85 T 0390/86 T 0243/87 T 0251/88 T 0392/91 T 0506/91 T 0939/91 T 0433/93 T 0528/93 T 0960/94 T 0476/95 T 0628/95 T 0225/96 T 0613/97 T 1221/97 T 0862/98 T 0071/99 T 0699/99 T 0054/00 T 0434/00 T 0611/01 T 0837/01 T 0042/02 T 0400/02 T 0900/02 T 1081/02 T 0095/04 T 0515/05 T 1170/05 T 0825/08 T 2362/08 T 0810/09 T 0577/11 T 2076/11 T 2582/11 T 0135/12 T 1929/12 T 0266/14 T 1788/14 T 0786/15 T 1647/15 T 2475/17 T 2994/18
Citing cases: -

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The appeals of the patent proprietor and opponent 2 are

admissible.

2. The request for referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is

refused.

3. The objection under Rule 106 EPC is dismissed.

4. The decision under appeal is set aside.

5. The case is remitted to the department of first instance for

further prosecution.

6. Both appeal fees are to be reimbursed.