T 0398/03 () of 4.11.2004

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2004:T039803.20041104
Date of decision: 04 November 2004
Case number: T 0398/03
Application number: 95105173.9
IPC class: F23R 3/40
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 17.265K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Catalytic gas turbine combustor
Applicant name: PRECISION COMBUSTION, INC.
Opponent name: ALSTOM (Schweiz) AG
Board: 3.2.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 111(1)
Keywords: Revocation in effect requested by both parties - patent revoked
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. An appeal was lodged by the Appellant (Opponent) against the decision of 6 February 2003 of the Opposition Division, with written reasons posted 4 March 2003, which rejected the opposition against European patent No. 0 677 707 (application No. 95 105 173.9), requesting that said decision be set aside and the patent be revoked in toto.

II. In response to the Board sending a summons to oral proceedings with an accompanying communication, the representative of the Respondent (Patentee) in a letter dated 7. June 2004 transmitted the declaration of surrender signed by the applicants "... the patent is abandoned."

III. The Board sent a communication pursuant to Rule 60(1) EPC (Rule 66(1) EPC) dated 23 June 2004 asking the Appellant if he wishes the appeal proceedings to be continued after the surrender of the patent.

IV. No reply to this communication was filed by the appellant in due time. In a telephone conversation date 3 November 2004 the representative of the Respondent continued that the declaration dated 7 June 2004 was meant as a surrender of the patent ab initio.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appeal is admissible.

2. The respondent has indicated that it desires to abandon the patent, ab initio. As the appellant likewise requests revocation, the parties' requests in effect coincide, and accordingly the Board in the exercise of its powers under Article 111(1) EPC decided to revoke the patent.

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

1. The decision under appeal is set aside.

2. The patent is revoked.

Quick Navigation