| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1986:J001186.19860806 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 06 August 1986 | ||||||||
| Case number: | J 0011/86 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 85304874.2 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | - | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | |||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Process for reducing the nitrate content in water | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Solt G.S., Klapwijk A. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.1.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Filing, search, designation fees not paid in due time Deficiency not correctable Reminders from EPO Restitutio not possible |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
A European patent application for which no filing, search and designation fees were paid in due time shall be deemed to be withdrawn (Art. 90(3), 91(4) EPC). The non-payment of these fees is not a correctable deficiency under Art. 91(2) EPC, which the EPO has to give the applicant an opportunity to correct. Thus, the appellants cannot derive any right from the non-issuance of a reminder by the EPO and restitutio in integrum is excluded by Art. 122(5) EPC whether or not such reminder has been sent. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/j860011eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
2 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Case Law Book: III Amendments
XCLR III E 3.2 Time limits excluded from re-establishment under Article 122(4) EPC and Rule 136(3) EPC