| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2015:T217210.20150312 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 12 March 2015 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 2172/10 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 03078711.3 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | B41M 5/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Ink jet recording element | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Eastman Kodak Company | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Mitsubishi HiTec Paper Europe GmbH Saito & Hata International Patent Office |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.2.05 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Lapse of patent in all designated states - termination of appeal proceedings | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. Opponent 01 lodged an appeal against the interlocutory decision of the opposition division dated 9 August 2010 concerning the maintenance of the European patent Nr. 1 426 195 in amended form.
II. In a communication by the registrar of the board dated 19 August 2014 the parties were informed that the above-mentioned European patent has been surrendered or has lapsed with effect for all the designated Contracting States and that the appeal proceedings may be continued at the request of the opponent, provided that within two months from notification of this communication a request is filed.
III. No reply was received to said communication.
Reasons for the Decision
1. Pursuant to Rule 84(1) EPC in conjunction with Rule 100(1), proceedings are not continued after the European patent has lapsed for all the designated Contracting States by non-payment of the renewal fees, unless there is a request to this effect by the opponent filed within two month as from the notification by the European Patent Office of the lapse.
2. As in the present case, no such request has been received, neither from the appellant nor from the non-appealing opponent 02 as a party to the proceedings as of right under Article 107, second sentence, EPC, the proceedings are to be terminated by a decision of the board.
Hence there was no need to decide whether a request for continuation of the proceedings can be validly filed by an opponent as a party as of right.
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal proceedings are terminated.
