T 0745/23 (preventing bacterial infection in fermentation/KEMIRA) of 20.03.2025
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2025:T074523.20250320
- Date of decision
- 20 March 2025
- Case number
- T 0745/23
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 11859141.1
- IPC class
- A01N 37/16C12N 1/16C12P 7/06
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen (C)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- Abstract on Article 15a RPBA
- Application title
- Method for preventing bacterial infection in a fermentation process
- Applicant name
- Kemira OYJ
- Opponent name
- ECOLAB USA INC.
- Board
- 3.3.08
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 112(1)European Patent Convention Art 123(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 013(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 021Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 15a(1)
- Keywords
- Oral proceedings by videoconference
Referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (no)
Amendments - allowable (no)
New request filed at oral proceedings - admitted (no) - Catchword
- Article 15a RPBA provides the board with the discretion to decide to hold oral proceedings pursuant to Article 116 EPC by videoconference if the board considers it appropriate to do so, either upon a party's request or of its own motion. Its scope is general and not limited to a pandemic situation (see point 7 of the Reasons).
The board exercises its discretion in view of the particular circumstances of the case and of the reasons provided by each party in support of their opposing requests as to the format, including the reasons why the party not consenting to a videoconference considers that videoconference, in the case in hand, is not suitable or why the party is otherwise disadvantaged (see points 10-13 of the Reasons). - Citing cases
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The request for referral of questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal is rejected.
2. The decision under appeal is set aside.
3. The patent is revoked.