Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Optional parameter $type declared before required parameter $nid is implicitly treated as a required parameter in include_once() (line 1442 of /home/patently/domains/xepc.eu/public_html/includes/bootstrap.inc).

CLR III I 8 Opposition procedure

According to T 234/86 (OJ 1989, 79), the opposition division can – and in certain circumstances must – maintain the patent as per the patentee's subordinate auxiliary request if he pursues main and auxiliary requests which are not allowable although taking precedence over the allowable one. Rejection of the requests which take precedence must be reasoned.

CLR III I 7 Interlocutory decision on allowable auxiliary request – distinction between examination proceedings and opposition proceedings

CLR III I 6.3 Practice of proposing one main and one or more auxiliary requests

CLR III I 6.2 Rejection in advance of further request by examining division

CLR III I 6.1 Direct rejection of auxiliary request by examining division

CLR III I 6 Examination procedure

6.1. Direct rejection of auxiliary request by examining division

6.2. Rejection in advance of further request by examining division

6.3. Practice of proposing one main and one or more auxiliary requests

CLR III I 5 Withdrawal of request

CLR III I 4 Obligation to give reasons for refusal of each request

If a decision relates to several requests, it must give reasons for the rejection of each one. It must be clear from the decision which considerations led the division to its conclusions (T 234/86 (inter partes), T 169/96 (ex parte)).

CLR III I 3.4 Admissibility of late-filed requests

CLR III I 3.3 Requesting further opportunity to formulate new requests

In T 792/92 the board considered as inadmissible the appellant's request at the end of the oral proceedings that, should the outcome of the discussions be negative for him, he be given the opportunity to formulate new requests.