T 1076/21 (GRAIN ORIENTED ELECTRICAL STEEL/JFE Steel) du 26.05.2023

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence: ECLI:EP:BA:2023:T107621.20230526
Date de la décision: 26 mai 2023
Numéro de l'affaire: T 1076/21
Requête en révision de: -
Numéro de la demande: 14857559.0
Classe de la CIB: C21D 9/46 C22C 38/00 H01F 1/16 C22C 38/60 C21D 8/12
Langue de la procédure: Anglais
Distribution: Distribuées aux présidents des chambres de recours (C)
Téléchargement: Décision en anglais
Versions JO: Aucun lien JO trouvé
Autres décisions pour cet affaire: -
Résumés pour cette décision: -
Titre de la demande: GRAIN ORIENTED ELECTRICAL STEEL SHEET HAVING EXCELLENT MAGNETIC CHARACTERISTICS AND COATING ADHESION
Nom du demandeur: JFE Steel Corporation
Nom de l'opposant: thyssenkrupp Electrical Steel GmbH
Chambre: 3.3.05
Sommaire: -
Dispositions juridiques pertinentes: European Patent Convention Art 100(b)European Patent Convention Art 111(1)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 12(2)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13(2)
Mots-clés: Grounds for opposition - insufficiency of disclosure (no)
Amendment after summons - exceptional circumstances (no)
Appeal decision - remittal to the department of first instance (yes)
primary object of appeal proceedings to review decision
Exergue: The burden of proof regarding the facts, arguments and evidence on the substance (which initially lies with the opponent) does not shift to the proprietor just because the patent has been revoked due to an alleged insufficient disclosure.
It is down to the patent proprietor to substantiate on appeal why that decision is wrong. The burden of proof on the substance (and in consequence the benefit of the doubt), however, is only shifted when the opposition division's assessment that the presented facts, arguments and evidence were sufficient to discharge the opponent's burden of proof turns out to be correct.
(See item 1. of the grounds)
Affaires citées: G 0009/91 G 0010/91 T 0182/89 T 0019/90 T 0585/92 T 0376/95 T 0499/00 T 0072/04 T 1210/05 T 0063/06 T 0066/07 T 2006/08 T 0338/10 T 0518/10 T 0262/11 T 0480/11 T 1558/11 T 1746/12 T 0325/13 T 1052/13 T 1608/13 T 0030/15 T 0347/15 T 0355/15 T 0430/15 T 1596/16 T 2218/16 T 0720/17 T 1529/17 T 1911/17 T 0055/18 T 0188/18 T 0942/18 T 1487/18 T 0260/19 T 1002/20 T 0428/21
Affaires citantes: T 0467/21 T 1509/21 T 1756/21 T 2176/21 T 0127/22 T 0261/22 T 1608/22 T 1708/22 T 1786/22 T 1867/22 T 2181/22 T 0034/23 T 1272/23 T 1320/23 T 1554/23

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The case is remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution.