European Patent Office

T 1007/01 (Intervention/EOS) du 27.10.2004

Identifiant européen de la jurisprudence
ECLI:EP:BA:2004:T100701.20041027
Date de la décision
27 octobre 2004
Numéro de l'affaire
T 1007/01
Requête en révision de
-
Numéro de la demande
96103986.4
Classe de la CIB
B29C 67/00
Langue de la procédure
Allemand
Distribution
Publiées au Journal officiel de l'OEB (A)
Téléchargement
Décision en allemand
Autres décisions pour cet affaire
T 1007/01 2005-09-30
Résumés pour cette décision
-
Titre de la demande
Vorrichtung und Verfahren zum Herstellen eines dreidimensionalen Objektes
Nom du demandeur
EOS GmbH Electro Optical Systems
Nom de l'opposant
3D Systems Inc.
Chambre
3.2.05
Sommaire

Under Article 112(1)(a) EPC the following points of law are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal for decision:

I. After withdrawal of the sole appeal, may the proceedings be continued with a third party who intervened during the appeal proceedings?

II. If the answer to question I is yes:

Is entitlement to continue the proceedings conditional on the intervener's compliance with formal requirements extending beyond the criteria for an admissible intervention explicitly laid down in Article 105 EPC; in particular, does the appeal fee have to be paid?

Mots-clés
Intervention in appeal proceedings
Continuation of proceedings after withdrawal of sole appeal
Referral to Enlarged Board of Appeal
Exergue
-

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

Under Article 112(1)(a) EPC the following points of law are referred to the Enlarged Board of Appeal for decision:

I. After withdrawal of the sole appeal, may the proceedings be continued with a third party who intervened during the appeal proceedings?

II. If the answer to question I is yes:

Is entitlement to continue the proceedings conditional on the intervener's compliance with formal requirements extending beyond the criteria for an admissible intervention explicitly laid down in Article 105 EPC; in particular, does the appeal fee have to be paid?