9.4.4 Fundamental deficiencies
This section has been updated to reflect case law and legislative changes up to 31 December 2023. For the previous version of this section please refer to the "Case Law of the Boards of Appeal", 10th edition (PDF). |
In T 989/19, the board held the contested decision to be invalid because the cover page had not been signed by all the members of the examining division, which amounted to a fundamental procedural deficiency in the proceedings before the examining division. Since the established case law had it that remittal of an appeal case did not adversely affect the appellant, the decision in this case could be issued without oral proceedings (see e.g. T 42/90 and T 382/10).
In T 2348/19 the chair of the opposition division had not signed either the minutes or the reasoned decision, and in neither case had it been explained in writing why the first examiner had signed on the chair's behalf. The case was remitted to the opposition division for further prosecution.