| http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#value | - In the circumstances of the present case, the appellants' letter dated 7 July 1994 (see point V, above) constituted first and foremost an application for re-establishment of rights under the provisions of Article 122 EPC, whereas the appeal was filed as a "second subsidiary request.In the practice before the EPO, a subsidiary (or auxiliary) request is generally considered as a request which is co
|
