J 0013/16 of 14.12.2017
- European Case Law Identifier
- ECLI:EP:BA:2017:J001316.20171214
- Date of decision
- 14 December 2017
- Case number
- J 0013/16
- Petition for review of
- -
- Application number
- 12785451.1
- IPC class
- F03B 13/10
- Language of proceedings
- English
- Distribution
- No distribution (D)
- Download
- Decision in English
- OJ versions
- No OJ links found
- Other decisions for this case
- -
- Abstracts for this decision
- -
- Application title
- HYDROMOTIVE MACHINE
- Applicant name
- Obermeyer, Henry
- Opponent name
- -
- Board
- 3.1.01
- Headnote
- -
- Relevant legal provisions
- European Patent Convention Art 122European Patent Convention Art 150(2)European Patent Convention Art 153(2)European Patent Convention Art 87(1)European Patent Convention R 115(2)European Patent Convention R 136Patent Cooperation Treaty Art 11(3)Patent Cooperation Treaty Art 48(2)Patent Cooperation Treaty R 26a(3)Patent Cooperation Treaty R 49b(2)Patent Cooperation Treaty R 82a(2)PLT_Art_013(2)_of_the_Regulations_of_the_PLTPLT_R_014(4)_of_the_Regulations_of_the_PLTPLT_R_014(5)_of_the_Regulations_of_the_PLTRules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(3)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(5)Rules of procedure of the Boards of Appeal Art 15(6)
- Keywords
- Restoration of the right of priority under the PCT (no)
Re-establishment of rights (no)
Legitimate expectations (no) - Catchword
- 1. If, in the international phase, a receiving Office (RO) has restored a right of priority under the "unintentional" criterion of Rule 26bis.3(a)(ii) PCT, the restoration is not effective in proceedings before the EPO acting as designated Office, since the EPO applies the "due care" criterion (Rule 49ter.1(b) PCT). In such cases, within the period specified in Rule 49ter.2(b)(i) PCT, the applicant must file a (new) request for restoration of a right of priority under Rule 49ter.2 PCT with the EPO acting as designated Office. For the purposes of Rule 49ter.2 PCT, the request filed with the RO under Rule 26bis.3(b) PCT cannot be taken into account in the proceedings before the EPO acting as designated Office. (See points 3.2 and 3.3 of the Reasons)
2. In proceedings before the EPO, re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC is ruled out in respect of the period under Rule 49ter.2(b)(i) PCT for filing a request for restoration of a right of priority. (See points 4.3 to 4.10 of the Reasons)
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is dismissed.