T 1047/92 () of 1.2.1994

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:1994:T104792.19940201
Date of decision: 01 February 1994
Case number: T 1047/92
Application number: 87400442.7
IPC class: H01L 23/52
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: C
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 101 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Multiple chip interconnection system and package
Applicant name: Digital Equipment Corporation
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.4.01
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65
Keywords: Form of appeal - missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
T 0013/82
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal contests the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office dated 31 July 1992, refusing the European patent No. 87 400 442.7. The decision was dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery on the day it was given. The Appellant filed a notice of appeal on 30 September 1992, and paid the fee for appeal on the same day. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a Statement of Grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

II. In a letter dated 27 November 1992 the Appellant informed the Board that "the Applicant has decided to abandon the above-mentioned application. Then, no written statement will be filed". In addition, the Appellant requested the reimbursement of the appeal fee.

III. By a communication dated 14 January 1993, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the Registry of the Board informed the Appellant that no Statement of Grounds has been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible and that no refund of the appeal fee would be possible. The Appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written Statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 65(1) EPC). The request for refund of the appeal fee is refused, following Decision T 13/82 (OJ EPO 1983, 411).


For these reasons, it is decided that:

1. The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

2. The appeal fee will not be refunded.

Quick Navigation