|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2018:T208514.20180125|
|Date of decision:||25 January 2018|
|Case number:||T 2085/14|
|IPC class:||B32B 27/06
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||MULTILAYER CONDUCTIVE APPLIANCE HAVING WOUND HEALING AND ANALGESIC PROPERTIES|
|Applicant name:||Argentum International, LLC|
|Opponent name:||Paul Hartmann AG|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. This decision concerns the appeal filed by the patent proprietor against the decision of the opposition division to revoke European patent No. 1 023 003.
II. The appellant/patent proprietor requested that the decision be set aside and that the patent be maintained as granted or alternatively on the basis of any of the auxiliary requests 1 to 9 filed with the statement setting out the grounds of appeal. Further auxiliary requests were submitted with letter of 14 June 2016.
III. The opponent/respondent requested that the appeal be dismissed.
IV. Oral proceedings were arranged to take place on 13 February 2018.
V. With letter of 11 December 2017 the appellant/patent proprietor declared that "The Patentee hereby expressly disapproves of the text of the granted patent, and is not offering any alternative text".
VI. Thereafter the oral proceedings were cancelled.
Reasons for the Decision
1. Article 113(2) EPC requires that the European Patent Office decide upon the European patent only in the text submitted to it, or agreed, by the proprietor of the patent.
2. Agreement cannot be deemed to be given and the opposed patent must be revoked if the proprietor, without submitting an amended text, expressly states that he/she no longer approves the text of the patent as granted or previously amended (T 73/84 OJ 1985, 241).
3. In the present situation, where the patent has been revoked by the decision under appeal and where there is no text of the patent on which basis the Board can consider the appeal of the appellant/patent proprietor, the proceedings are to be terminated by a decision ordering the dismissal of the appeal, without going into the substantive issues (T 703/03).
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.