T 2199/11 - Patent acquired by opponent

Key point

• The Board notes that the patent was said to have been acquired by Opponent 1, but that did not affect the admissibility of the appeal of Opponent 2, because the transfer of the patent had not effect under Rule 22(3) for lack of evidentiary documents being filed. 
• As a comment, Rule 22 of course also requires payment of an administrative fee, which was neither the case. Moreover, the immediate effect of the transfer, even if registered, on admissibility of the appeal is not so clear to me. 

EPO T 2199/11 -  link

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appeal [of Opponent 2] is admissible. The alleged acquisition of the opposed patent by former opponent 1 (Gemalto SA) (see point VI above) has no effect on the present appeal proceedings. Pursuant to Rule 20(3) in conjunction with Rule 61 EPC 1973 (now Rule 22(3) EPC and Rule 85 EPC, respectively), a transfer of a European patent made during opposition appeal proceedings shall have effect vis-à-vis the EPO only when and to the extent documents satisfying the EPO that the transfer has taken place have been produced. However, no documents in support of a transfer of the opposed patent to former opponent 1 (Gemalto SA) have been produced.