T 2138/09 (No grounds filed) of 22.2.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T213809.20100222
Date of decision: 22 February 2010
Case number: T 2138/09
Application number: 00943434.1
IPC class: H01L 21/768
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.256K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method of protecting an underlying wiring layer during dual damascene processing
Applicant name: Intel Corporation
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.4.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: -
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. This is an appeal against the refusal of European patent application No. 00943434 posted 19 May 2009.

A notice of appeal on behalf of the applicant appellant was filed on 20 July 2009. The appeal fee was paid on the same day. No separate statement of grounds of appeal was filed.

II. By a communication dated 11 November 2009 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the appellant was informed that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that, therefore, it was to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Article 108, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

III. No answer has been given to the communication within the time limit. No request re-establishment of rights was filed.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed and as the notice of appeal does not contain anything that could be regarded as a statement of grounds of appeal according to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation