| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:1986:W000485.19860422 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 22 April 1986 | ||||||||
| Case number: | W 0004/85 | ||||||||
| Application number: | - | ||||||||
| IPC class: | - | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | DE | ||||||||
| Distribution: | |||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | - | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Schick | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.2.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | The reasons for the finding that the international application does not comply with the requirement of unity of invention must be given in the invitation to pay additional search fees provided for in Article 17(3)(a) PCT. It is not sufficient to list the inventions contained in the application if the applicant cannot infer from this list alone that his application does not relate to a single general inventive step within the meaning of Rule 13.1 PCT. | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Substantiation of the invitation pursuant to Article 17(3)(a) and Rules 13 and 40 PCT | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Source: http://www.epo.org/law-practice/case-law-appeals/recent/w850004ep1.html
Date retrieved: 17 May 2021
10 references found.
Click X to load a reference inside the current page, click on the title to open in a new page.PCT Articles
PCT Implementing Rules
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)