T 0556/95 (Undeniable systems) of 8.8.1996

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:1996:T055695.19960808
Date of decision: 08 August 1996
Case number: T 0556/95
Application number: 88202620.6
IPC class: H04L 9/30
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: A
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 426 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: OJ | Published
Title of application: Undeniable signature systems
Applicant name: SECURITY TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.5.01
Headnote: The conditions for amendment of an application laid down in Article 123(1) EPC in conjunction with Rule 86(3) EPC remain applicable so long as the Examining Division retains competence over the application, including after the issue of a communication under Rule 51(6) EPC, and until the decision to refuse or grant the application is taken (cf. G 7/93).
The right to be heard at oral proceedings under Article 116(1) EPC subsists so long as proceedings are pending before the EPO, and a request for oral proceedings must be granted (ie oral proceedings must be appointed) before any request of a party (whether procedural or substantive) is decided against that party so as to cause them a loss of rights. This applies also in the case of a request for oral proceedings to discuss amendments submitted after the issue of a communication under Rule 51(6) EPC. The discretion of the Examining Division under Rule 86(3) EPC must be exercised in such circumstances having regard to Article 116(1) EPC. The Enlarged Board has no power to limit the application of Article 116(1) EPC by means of any guidance it may lay down as to how an Examining Division should exercise its discretion under Rule 86(3) EPC.
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 97(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 97(2)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 113(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 113(2)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 116(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 116(2)
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 123(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 51(4)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 51(6)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 67
European Patent Convention 1973 R 86(3)
Keywords: Request for oral proceedings refused following submission of amendments after Rule 51(6) communication - procedural violation
Decision based on new grounds - procedural violation
Reimbursement of the appeal fee
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
G 0012/91
G 0007/93
T 0019/87
T 0283/88
T 0560/88
T 0598/88
T 0663/90
T 0808/94
Citing decisions:
T 0114/09
T 2573/11
T 1775/12

Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/t950556ex1.html

Date retrieved: 17 May 2021

23 references found.

Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.

EPO Guidelines - C Procedureal Aspects of Substantive Examination

EPO Guidelines - E General Procedural Matters

Offical Journal of the EPO

Case Law Book: III Amendments

Case Law Book: V Priority

Case Law of the Enlarged Board

General Case Law