Alle Fälle anzeigen
CoA PC 01/2024
—·EP3404726 +1 more: ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE
- Verfahrensdetails
- Status—Verfahrensart—KategorieSonstige prozessuale
- Parteien
- BeklagteVertreter: Dorothea Hofer (Prüfer & Partner mbB Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte); Andreas Oser (Prüfer & Partner mbB Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte); Peter Klein (Prüfer & Partner mbB Patentanwälte Rechtsanwälte)
- Division
- —
- Richter
- Klaus Grabinski · President of the Court of Appeal
- Emanuela Germano · Judge
- Emmanuel Gougé · Judge-Rapporteur
- Technology
- Semiconductor Devices
- Sprache
- —
Entscheidungen
- 2024-10-15AbgewiesenAppeal RoP220.2
Court of Appeal declared Photon Wave's appeal inadmissible. The CoA held that leave to appeal under R.220.2 RoP (other than together with an appeal against the final decision) must be expressly granted by the Court of First Instance and cannot be presumed. As no express leave to appeal was granted by the Paris Local Division, the appeal was inadmissible.
Rechtsfragen:Leave to appeal under R.220.2 RoPExpress grant of leave to appeal requiredInadmissibility of appeal without express leave - 2024-10-15AbgewiesenAppeal RoP220.2
Court of Appeal declared Photon Wave's appeal inadmissible. The Court held that leave to appeal under R. 220.2 RoP must be expressly granted by the Court of First Instance and cannot be presumed. Since the Paris Local Division had not expressly granted leave to appeal the procedural order of 24 July 2024, the appeal was inadmissible.
Rechtsfragen:Admissibility of appeal (R. 220.2 RoP)Leave to appeal from procedural orderExpress grant of leave required
Dokumente
- Order%20%28EN%20translation%29_PHOTON%20WAVE%20v.%20SEOUL%20VIOSYS_2024_10_15.pdf2024-10-15FRENCH
- Procedural%20order%20PHOTON%20WAVE%20v.%20SEOUL%20VIOSYS_signed.pdf2024-10-15FRENCH