| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2003:T118302.20030217 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 17 February 2003 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1183/02 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 99910558.8 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H03F 3/08 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | A | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | BUFFER CIRCUIT | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | QinetiQ Limited | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | A response to a summons to oral proceedings before the examining division which response contains good faith responsive amendments and arguments does not stay the summons. Hence omission of confirmation that the summons remains valid does not constitute a substantial procedural violation within the meaning of Rule 67 EPC. (Reasons 3 to 8). | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Substantial procedural violation (no) Reimbursement of appeal fee following interlocutory revision (no) |
||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t021183ex1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
6 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.Offical Journal of the EPO
XOJ EPO SE 1/2021, p179 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2020)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2020, p174 - Annex 1 - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2019)
XOJ EPO SE 1/2019, p158 - XVI. - Index of published decisions of the boards of appeal and the Enlarged Board of Appeal - (as at 31 December 2018)