| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2025:T165423.20251001 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 01 October 2025 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1654/23 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 18194325.9 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H04R 25/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | ITE hearing device | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Sonova AG | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Oticon A/S GN Hearing A/S |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.05 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Revocation of the patent - (yes): no approved claims on file | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. Opponent 1 (appellant) filed an appeal against the opposition division's interlocutory decision maintaining the opposed patent in amended form. Opponent 2 withdrew its appeal.
II. The appellant requested that the decision under appeal bet set aside and that the patent be revoked in its entirety.
III. In response to the board's preliminary opinion issued under Article 15(1) RPBA, the proprietor (respondent) indicated, by its submission dated 15 September 2025, that it no longer approved the text based on which the patent had been granted and that it would not submit any amended text. With this submission, the proprietor also withdrew all requests submitted in the opposition and appeal proceedings.
IV. The board thereupon cancelled the arranged oral proceedings.
Reasons for the Decision
1. Pursuant to Article 113(2) EPC, the EPO shall examine, and decide upon, the European patent only in the text submitted, or agreed, by the proprietor of the patent.
2. Such an agreement cannot be deemed to exist where - as in the present case - the proprietor expressly states that it no longer approves the text of the patent and that it would not be submitting an amended text.
3. Thus, there is no text of the patent on the basis of which the board could consider the appeal.
4. In these circumstances, the appeal proceedings are to be terminated by a decision ordering revocation of the patent without examination as to patentability (see e.g. T 73/84, OJ EPO 1985, 241).
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The patent is revoked.
