T 0930/92 (Ion beam processing) vom 29.05.1995
- Europäischer Rechtsprechungsidentifikator
- ECLI:EP:BA:1995:T093092.19950529
- Datum der Entscheidung
- 29. Mai 1995
- Aktenzeichen
- T 0930/92
- Antrag auf Überprüfung von
- -
- Anmeldenummer
- 82109014.9
- IPC-Klasse
- H01J 37/30
- Verfahrenssprache
- Englisch
- Verteilung
- Im Amtsblatt des EPA veröffentlicht (A)
- Download
- Entscheidung auf Englisch
- Amtsblattfassungen
- Weitere Entscheidungen für diese Akte
- -
- Zusammenfassungen für diese Entscheidung
- -
- Bezeichnung der Anmeldung
- Ion beam processing apparatus and method of correcting mask defects
- Name des Antragstellers
- Hitachi
- Name des Einsprechenden
- ICT
- Kammer
- 3.4.01
- Leitsatz
I. There is an equitable obligation upon every party who is summoned to oral proceedings to inform the EPO as soon as it knows that it will not attend as summoned. This is the case whether or not that party has itself requested oral proceedings, and whether or not a communication has accompanied the summons to oral proceedings.
II. If a party who has been summoned to oral proceedings fails to attend as summoned without notifying the EPO in advance that it will not attend, an apportionment of costs in favour of another party who has attended as summoned may be justified for reasons of equity in accordance with Article 104(1) EPC.
III. When fixing the amount of costs to be paid to a party, in addition to the remuneration of the professional representative of that party, the expenses incurred by an employee of that party in order to instruct the professional representative before and during oral proceedings may be taken into consideration under Rule 63(1) EPC, if such instruction was "necessary to assure proper protection of the rights involved."
- Relevante Rechtsnormen
- European Patent Convention Art 104 1973European Patent Convention Art 133 1973European Patent Convention Art 56 1973European Patent Convention R 63 1973European Patent Convention R 71 1973
- Schlagwörter
- Inventive step (yes)
Oral proceedings appointed following auxiliary requests by both parties
No communication under Article 11(2) RPBA
Appellant failed to appear at oral proceedings as summoned
Apportionment of costs in favour of Respondent
Fixed amount ordered
Reasonable level of costs - Orientierungssatz
- -
- Zitierte Akten
- T 0003/90
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The appeal is dismissed.
2. The Appellant shall pay the Respondent the sum of DM 20 750, by way of apportionment of costs.