Error message

Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of includes/bootstrap.inc).
Deprecated function: Using ${var} in strings is deprecated, use {$var} instead in include_once() (line 1442 of 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 includes/bootstrap.inc).

R. 111(2) EPC expressly stipulates that appealable decisions are to be reasoned.

CLR III K 3.3.3.E Draft decisions

CLR III K 3.3.3.D Illegible signature

In D 8/82 (OJ 1983, 378) the surname of the signature appeared only as a mark in which one could still discern the first letter and which was recognisably intended as a signature. The board held that it was valid since in several contracting states of the EPO there is no requirement that a signature be legible or recognisably composed of letters. It is enough that it serves to identify the signatory.

CLR III K 3.3.3.C Decision in written proceedings

CLR III K 3.3.3.B Death of examiner between oral proceedings and written decision

CLR III K 3.3.3.A Computer-generated communications

Under R. 113(2) EPC the signature can be replaced by a seal when a computer is used to produce the decision.

CLR III K 3.3.3 Examples of valid signatures

a) Computer-generated communications

b) Death of examiner between oral proceedings and written decision

c) Decision in written proceedings

CLR III K 3.3.2.B Director's signature in place of examiner's signature

In T 211/05 the board held that a director's signature purporting to be on behalf of the second examiner was invalid because nothing in the EPC 1973 authorised a director to sign on behalf of a member of an examining division to which he did not himself belong.

CLR III K 3.4.2 Right to be heard – right to have submissions taken into consideration

CLR III K 3.4.1 Purpose of the duty to provide reasons

CLR III K 3.4 Reasons for the decision