FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos. 12965/07 and 23733/09
Vladimir Vyacheslavovich VINOGRADOV against Russia
and Maksim Yevgenyevich RODIONOV against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 10 January 2012 as a Chamber composed of:
	Nina Vajić, President,
	Anatoly Kovler,
	Elisabeth Steiner,
	Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
	Julia Laffranque,
	Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos,
	Erik Møse, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on 18 February 2007 and 17 March 2009, respectively,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants are two Russian nationals, Mr Vladimir Vyacheslavovich Vinogradov, who was born on 20 June 1966 and lives in St. Petersburg, and Mr Maksim Yevgenyevich Rodionov, who was born on 17 April 1984 and lives in Sverdlova, Leningrad Region. Their applications were lodged with the Court on 18 February 2007 and 17 March 2009, respectively. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicants complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention. In particular, the first applicant complained about unreasonable length of domestic court proceedings in connection with a criminal case, in which he acted as a civil claimant. The second applicant complained about unreasonable length of domestic court proceedings in connection with a dispute over premises in a flat, occupied by his family.
On 29 April 2010, the Court communicated the applicants’ complaints to the respondent Government under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court. The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the cases on 13 and 15 September 2010, respectively.
By letters of 24 September 2010, the applicants were invited to submit, by 26 November 2010, their comments on the Government’s observations, together with any claims for just satisfaction. No replies were received to the Court’s letters.
In view of the absence of the applicants’ replies, by letters of 17 January 2011, sent by registered mail, the applicants were informed that the time-limit for submission of their observations or claims for just satisfaction had expired on 26 November 2010, and that no extension of time had been requested. No responses followed.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
	Søren Nielsen	Nina Vajić
	Registrar	President