| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1995:T076591.19950426 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 26 April 1995 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0765/91 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 85903320.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C08F 20/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Polymeric products and their production | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Allied Colloids Limited | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | SNF Floerger | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | The patentee ... no longer approves the text which was granted Termination of appeal proceedings - request for revocation of the patent |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. In a decision given on 18 June 1991, with written reasons posted on 31 July 1991, the Opposition Division rejected the opposition filed against European patent No. 0 188 489 granted upon the subject-matter of European patent application No. 85 903 320.1.
II. On 30 September 1991 the Appellant (Opponent) appealed against this decision and paid the appropriate fee on the same date. Statements of Grounds were filed on 2. December 1991 in which the Appellant requested that the patent be revoked.
III. In a letter dated 18 April 1995 the representative of the Respondent (Proprietor of the patent) stated "The patentee ... no longer approves the text which was granted".
Reasons for the Decision
1. The appeal complies with Articles 106 to 108 and Rule 64 EPC and is admissible.
2. The Respondent made it clear through their representative that they no longer approve the text in which the patent was granted without submitting an amended text on which further prosecution of the appeal could be based. Therefore the patent must be revoked (Article 113(2) EPC; see also Decision T 73/84, OJ EPO 1985, 241).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision of the Opposition Division is set aside.
2. The patent is revoked.
