| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2017:J001316.20171214 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 14 December 2017 | ||||||||
| Case number: | J 0013/16 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 12785451.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | F03B 13/10 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | HYDROMOTIVE MACHINE | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Obermeyer, Henry | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.1.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Restoration of the right of priority under the PCT (no) Re-establishment of rights (no) Legitimate expectations (no) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
1. If, in the international phase, a receiving Office (RO) has restored a right of priority under the "unintentional" criterion of Rule 26bis.3(a)(ii) PCT, the restoration is not effective in proceedings before the EPO acting as designated Office, since the EPO applies the "due care" criterion (Rule 49ter.1(b) PCT). In such cases, within the period specified in Rule 49ter.2(b)(i) PCT, the applicant must file a (new) request for restoration of a right of priority under Rule 49ter.2 PCT with the EPO acting as designated Office. For the purposes of Rule 49ter.2 PCT, the request filed with the RO under Rule 26bis.3(b) PCT cannot be taken into account in the proceedings before the EPO acting as designated Office. (See points 3.2 and 3.3 of the Reasons) 2. In proceedings before the EPO, re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC is ruled out in respect of the period under Rule 49ter.2(b)(i) PCT for filing a request for restoration of a right of priority. (See points 4.3 to 4.10 of the Reasons) |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/j160013eu1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021