EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal Says EP Application is Pending Until Expiry of Appeal Period (G 1/09)

Rule 25(1) EPC 1973 (and equally Rule 36(1) EPC) states "The applicant may file a divisional application relating to any pending earlier European patent application". In the EP patent application 01102231.6 the question arose whether or not for an application that has been refused in oral proceedings a divisional application can still be filed until the lapse of the two-months time limit for filing a notice of appeal according to Art. 108 EPC. I think that a fair understanding of the basic principles of procedural law should lead to the conclusion that any legal case is pending until a final decision enters into effect - i.e. until no remedies are given any more. Quite to the contrary, the Examination Division took the position that upon refusal of the application its pendency ended and no division could be filed after that point in time. However, as already sketched by the IPKat, this understanding would lead to the strange situation that "if an appeal is then filed against the decision the application miraculously becomes pending again" such that "an application could be considered to have been pending only in retrospect. The Enlarged Board of Appeal had to decide this issue in case G 1/09, after the following question has been referred to the Board in decision J 2/08: Is an application which has been refused by a decision of the Examining Division thereafter still pending within the meaning of Rule 25 EPC 1973 (Rule 36(1) EPC) until the expiry of the time limit for filing a notice of appeal, when no appeal has been filed? Quite naturally, the Enlarged Board's decision referred to the above-referenced basic principles of procedural law and found the concept that it is “accepted that the final (res iudicata) character of a first-instance decision (Rechtskraft) will only ensue upon expiry of the time limit for filing an appeal” indeed well-established in the Contracting States - e.g. in the Code of Civil Procedure of Germany (§ 705, Zivilprozessordnung) and of France (Article 500, Code de Procédure Civile) - which in essence provides that decisions do not become final until the expiry of the respective period for seeking ordinary means of legal redress, such that there is no r…

» Vollständiger Artikel
  • Infos zum Artikel
  • Kommentare
  • Ähnliches
  • Links

Themen: Epo , Enlarged Board OF Appeal , Divisional Application , J2/08 , Refusal OF Application , Pendency , G1/09 , Legal Case

Erschienen 4. Oktober 2010 auf http://www.visaepatentes.com.

Sie haben eine Meinung zum Thema? Artikels kommentieren
Artikel kommentieren

EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal Says EP Application is Pending Until Expiry of Appeal Period (G 1/09)

Visae Patentes | 4. Oktober 2010 — Rule 25(1) EPC 1973 (and equally Rule 36(1) EPC) states "The applicant may file a divisional application relating to any pending e…

T 1423/07 - Double Patenting is Possible According to the EPC

Visae Patentes | 10. Mai 2010 — The recent decision T 1423/07 of the EPO Board of Appeal disagreed with the opinion of the Examining Division, according to which…

EPO tightens Information Disclosure Requirements

Visae Patentes | 4. August 2010 — Since the entering into force of the revised European Patent Convention (EPC 2000) on 13 December 2007, the EPO may "invite the a…

Reminder: Changes of EPC Entering Into Force as from 1 January 2011 (Information on Prior Art)

Visae Patentes | 26. Dezember 2010 — As already mentioned earlier on this blog, the following important changes of the EPC Implementing Regulations will enter into fo…

Technical Board of Appeal rejects Computer-implemented Invention in the field of Bioinformatics (T 784/06)

Visae Patentes | 4. November 2010 — I just came across the very interesting decision T 784/06 of an EPO Technical Board of Appeal, relating to the rather new scientif…

Combination of features not derivable from application as filed – (T 2118/08)

KandidatenWiki | 1. Dezember 2011 — T 2118/08 – 3.3.09 [2.3.2]: As to whether or not the generation of a fresh particular combination contravenes Article 123(2…

Entscheidungsplan von EuG und EuGH

MarkenBlog | 2. März 2010 — Das Harmonisierungsamt für den Binnenmarkt HABM informiert über die in dieser Woche anstehenden Entscheidungen und Anhörungen i…

Rechtsmittel gegen eines kalifornischen Urteils

USA Recht | 22. Juni 2010 — Eine Klage nach kalifornischem Recht (California Code of Civil Procedure § 1049) rechtsmittelfähig, solange noch kein Berufungs…

A Communication Pursuent Rule 161 EPC is no "Fist Communication" According to Rule 26(1) EPC

Visae Patentes | 16. Juli 2010 — Rule 36(1) EPC and Rule 161 EPC have been amended as of 1 April 2010. In the meantime, among practicioners the question occured w…

G 1/06 - Zur Problematik der Teilanmeldungen

ipweblog.de | 17. Juli 2007 — Die große Beschwerdekammer hat sich in G 1/06 nun zur Problematik der Teilanmeldungen geäußert. Leitsatz: “In the case of…

EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION: Implementing Regulations: PART III - IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS TO PART III OF THE CONVENTION, Chapter I - Filing of the European patent application, Rule 36 - European divisional applications
EPO - Enlarged Board of Appeal
EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION 1973: Implementing Regulations: PART III - IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS TO PART III OF THE CONVENTION, Chapter I - Filing of the European patent application, Rule 25 - Provisions for European divisional applications
Register Plus - EP01102231
EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION: PART VI - APPEALS PROCEDURE, Article 108 - Time limit and form
The IPKat: G 1/09: When is a patent application pending?
Register Plus PDF viewer
§ 705 ZPO (Zivilprozessordnung), Formelle Rechtskraft - JUSLINE Deutschland

§ 705 ZPO (Zivilprozessordnung), Formelle Rechtskraft - JUSLINE Deutschland Gesetz Kommentar


EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION 1973: PART II - SUBSTANTIVE PATENT LAW, Chapter III - Effects of the European patent and the European patent application, Article 67 - Rights conferred by a European patent application after publication
K's law: G 1/09 – Pending Matters
EPO – Enlarged Board of Appeal decides on pendency of European patent applications - EPLAW Patent Blog

EPO, Enlarged Board of Appeal, 27 September 2010, Decision No. G 1/09 – Pending application/SONY The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) answered the question referred to it by the Legal Board of Appeal in J 2/08 (OJ EPO 2010, 100) as follows: “In the case where no appeal is filed, a European Patent application which has been refused by a decision of the Examining Division is thereafter still pending within the meaning of Rule 25 EPC 1973 (Rule 36(1) EPC) until the expiry of the time limit for filing a notice of appeal.” Although new time limits for filing divisional...