T 1555/14 () of 2.11.2016

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2016:T155514.20161102
Date of decision: 02 November 2016
Case number: T 1555/14
Application number: 02253253.5
IPC class: F01D 5/18
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 222.942K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Turbine airfoil with single aft flowing three pass serpentine cooling circuit
Applicant name: GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
Opponent name: ALSTOM Technology Ltd
Board: 3.2.06
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention R 84(1)
European Patent Convention R 100(1)
European Patent Convention R 126(2)
European Patent Convention R 131
European Patent Convention R 134(1)
Keywords: Lapse of patent in all designated states - termination of appeal proceedings
Catchwords:

-

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 30 May 2014 which found that European patent No. 1 362 982 in an amended form met the requirements of the EPC.

II. In a communication dated 24 June 2016, the Board informed the parties that the patent in suit had lapsed with effect for all the designated Contracting States and invited the appellant to inform the board, within two months from notification of the communication, whether it requested a continuation of the appeal proceedings (Rules 84(1) and 100(1) EPC).

III. No reply was received from the appellant/opponent within the two month period.

Reasons for the Decision

1. Rule 84(1) EPC provides that 'if the European patent has been surrendered in all the designated Contracting States or has lapsed in all those States, the opposition proceedings may be continued at the request of the opponent filed within two months of a communication from the European Patent Office informing him of the surrender or lapse.'

2. Based on Rule 100(1) EPC, Rule 84(1) EPC applies mutatis mutandis in opposition appeal proceedings, i.e. the appeal proceedings may be continued at the request of the appellant/opponent filed within two months as from notification of the lapse.

3. In the present case, the notification of the lapse within the meaning of Rule 84(1) EPC was sent by registered letter to the appellant on 24 June 2016. The period for requesting continuation of the appeal proceedings ended on 5 September 2016 by virtue of Rule 126(2) EPC) in conjunction with Rules 131 and 134(1) EPC. Since no such request was filed within that time limit, the appeal proceedings are terminated.

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal proceedings are terminated.

Quick Navigation