J 0009/10 (Request for refund of the examination fee) of 18.04.2012
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2012:J000910.20120418
- Date of decision
- 18 April 2012
- Case number
- J 0009/10
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 07109768.7
- IPC class
- A63B 23/035A63B 23/04
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- Distributed to board chairmen and members (B)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- Stationary exercise device
- Applicant name
- Chuang, Jin Chen
Chuang, Lung Fei - Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.1.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- Decision President of the European Patent Office dated 12 July 2007 concerning the entrustment to non-examining staff of certain duties normally the responsibility of the examining or opposition divisionsEuropean Patent Convention Art 18(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 94(1)European Patent Convention Art 94(1) 1973European Patent Convention Art 94(2) 1973European Patent Convention Art 94(3)European Patent Convention Art 96(1) 1973European Patent Convention R 10(2)European Patent Convention R 10(3)European Patent Convention R 11(3)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 13Rules relating to fees Art 10b(b)
- Keywords
- Partial refund of the examination fee (yes)
Beginning of 'substantial examination' on despatch of EPO Form 2001A generated automatically without the involvement of an examiner (no)
Reimbursement of the appeal fee (no) - Catchword
- A communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC on EPO Form 2001A which is automatically generated by a computer and posted by a formalities officer without the involvement of an examiner appointed to the examining division does not constitute a legally effective act of the examining division and cannot therefore be regarded as the beginning of "substantive examination" pursuant to Article 10b(b) of the Rules relating to Fees (inserted by decision of the Administrative Council of 10 June 1988, as last amended by decision of the Administrative Council of 15 December 2005).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
1. The decision under appeal is set aside.
2. The case is remitted to the department of first instance with the order to refund the examination fee at a rate of 75%.
3. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is refused.