T 1891/20 (Switching subscriptions/THALES) du 15.11.2021
- Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
- ECLI:EP:BA:2021:T189120.20211115
- Date de la décision
- 15 novembre 2021
- Numéro de l'affaire
- T 1891/20
- Requête en révision de
- -
- Numéro de la demande
- 14824813.1
- Classe de la CIB
- H04W 8/18
- Langue de la procédure
- Anglais
- Distribution
- Non distribuées (D)
- Téléchargement
- Décision en anglais
- Versions JO
- Aucun lien JO trouvé
- Autres décisions pour cet affaire
- T 1891/20 Request for correction of the minutes/THALES 2022-05-16
- Résumés pour cette décision
- -
- Titre de la demande
- Method for accessing a service and a corresponding device
- Nom du demandeur
- Thales Dis France SAS
- Nom de l'opposant
- IDEMIA France
Giesecke+Devrient Mobile Security GmbH
Giesecke & Devrient GmbH - Chambre
- 3.5.03
- Sommaire
- -
- Dispositions juridiques pertinentes
- European Patent Convention Art 104(1)European Patent Convention Art 105(1)(a)European Patent Convention Art 108European Patent Convention Art 128(4)European Patent Convention Art 54European Patent Convention Art 56European Patent Convention R 144(d)European Patent Convention R 151European Patent Convention R 99(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal 2020 Art 010(6)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)
- Mots-clés
- Admissibility of intervention - (yes): coordination of procedural acts by opponents and/or interveners is not vexatious or illegitimate
Admissibility of appeals
Admissibility of appeal - (yes): distinction between admissibility of an appeal vs. admittance of late-filed submissions
Abuse of procedure - (no): referring to evidence provided by other parties is no "abuse of procedure"
Inventive step - main request (no)
Admittance of claim request filed after summons - (no): no exceptional circumstances
Apportionment of costs - (no)
Exclusion of documents from file inspection - annexes 3 and 4 (yes): prejudicial to the parties' legitimate personal or economic interests - Exergue
- -
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The patent is revoked.
3. The requests for apportionment of costs are refused.
4. The appeal fee paid by the respondent is reimbursed at 50%.
5. Annexes 3 and 4 to the respondent's reply to the notice of intervention are excluded from file inspection.