| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1995:J003094.19951009 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 09 October 1995 | ||||||||
| Case number: | J 0030/94 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 81103893.4 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H01L 27/08 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Semiconductor drive | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | KABUSHIKI KAISHA TOSHIBA | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.1.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Jurisdiction of the Legal Board of Appeal Lost interest in the procedure pursuing Request for the file to be closed Reimbursement of appeal fee (yes) Equity Right to fair procedure Legal expectation Principle of protecting legitimate expectations |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
1. The Legal Board is competent to decide an appeal against a decision of the Examining Division refusing a request for correction of errors in a decision to grant a European patent. 2. The statement "We have lost interest in performing an appeal procedure and request to leave closed the file" constitutes a withdrawal of the appeal. 3. After withdrawal of an appeal a reimbursement of the appeal fee can exceptionally be ordered if the appeal was not remitted to the Board of Appeal within a reasonable time after the first instance decision not to allow it. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/j940030eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021