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).
An appeal filed in the name of the representative instead of the party adversely affected by the decision impugned was rejected as inadmissible in J 1/92.
Under Art. 107, first sentence, EPC, an EPO decision can be appealed only by a party to the proceedings which gave rise to it. Concerning the entitlement to appeal of a transferee of a patent, see chapter III.O.1. "Party status as patent proprietor".
Where a request under R. 64(2) EPC for a refund of a further search fee paid under R. 64(1) EPC is first filed on appeal against an examining division decision, the board has no competence to decide on it and it must therefore be refused as inadmissible (T 2076/15).
Art. 21(3)(a) EPC expressly states that appeals against decisions concerning the limitation or revocation of European patents should be heard by the technical boards of appeal.