| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2008:J000907.20080630 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 30 June 2008 | ||||||||
| Case number: | J 0009/07 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 04257544.9 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | G01N 35/10 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Clinical laboratory apparatus | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | 1. KABUSHIKI KAISHA TOSHIBA 2. Toshiba Medical Systems Corporation |
||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.1.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Request to refer a question to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - rejected Request for re-establishment of rights with respect to the priority period - not admissible |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
Article 122 (5) EPC 1973 has to be interpreted in accordance with its proper wording and that wording leaves no doubt or ambiguity that restitutio in integrum with respect to the time limit referred to in Article 87 (1) EPC 1973 has been excluded by the legislator. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/j070009eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
14 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.EPC Articles
EPC Implementing Rules
Case Law Book: II Conditions to be met by an Application
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
XCLR III H 4.2 Effects on the case law due to the differences between national legislation and the EPC