Boards of Appeal symbol


Boards of Appeal

Contact us using an online form

Richard-Reitzner-Allee 8
85540 Haar

All contact information

Boards of Appeal and key decisions conference

14-15 November 2018
EPO Munich

Register now


T 0199/08 () of 26.5.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T019908.20100526
Date of decision: 26 May 2010
Case number: T 0199/08
Application number: 97104936.6
IPC class: B32B 15/08
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.487K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Laminated metal sheet and metal container
Applicant name: Toyo Boseki Kabushiki Kaisha
Opponent name: ArcelorMittal France
Board: 3.3.09
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention R 84(1)
European Patent Convention R 100(1)
Keywords: Patent lapsed in all designated states
Termination of appeal proceedings


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appellant (opponent) lodged an appeal against the interlocutory decision of the opposition division of 27 November 2007 maintaining the European patent EP-B-0 798 109 in amended form.

II. In a communication from the registrar of the board dated 12 May 2010 the parties were informed that the European patent had lapsed for all the designated states and that the appeal proceedings could be continued at the request of the opponent provided that within two months from the notification of this communication a request to this effect was filed.

III. The appellant did not request the continuation of the proceedings (see its letter dated 19 May 2010).

Reasons for the Decision

1. Pursuant to Rule 84(1) EPC in conjunction with Rule 100(1) EPC, proceedings will only be continued after the European patent has lapsed for non-payment of the renewal fees if there is a request to this effect by the opponent filed within two months as from the notification by the European Patent Office of the lapse.

2. As in the present case, the appellant expressly announced that it did not request the continuation of the proceedings, these are terminated.


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal proceedings are terminated.

Quick Navigation