| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2010:J000309.20100528 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 28 May 2010 | ||||||||
| Case number: | J 0003/09 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 06758637.0 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H01M 8/04 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | B | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Fuel cells | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | The Gillette Company | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.1.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: | |||||||||
| Keywords: | Refund of claims fees (no) Abandonment of subject-matter (no) Arbitrary delay by Office (no) Permission to prosecute all claims subject to payment of additional search fees (no) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
1. Although the procedure on entry of an application into the European phase where the EPO has acted as the International Searching Authority has changed with the coming into force of EPC 2000, the responsibility for establishing whether or not the application meets the requirements of unity of invention still ultimately rests with the Examining Division, and the opinion of the EPO acting as the International Searching Authority on lack of unity is not final or binding on the Examining Division. 2. In the case of an a posteriori objection of non unity, even if justified, the claims may still usefully serve as a basis for later limiting the claimed subject-matter to a more specifically defined but now unitary and searched invention. 3. The payment of claims fees for claims exceeding the number of ten may thus have a useful purpose on its own independently of whether all the claims concern unitary subject-matter. |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/j090003eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021