11.6. Substantial procedural violation
  1. Home
  2. Legal texts
  3. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal
  4. Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office
  5. V. Proceedings before the Boards of Appeal
  6. A. Appeal procedure
  7. 11. Reimbursement of appeal fees
  8. 11.6. Substantial procedural violation
  9. 11.6.17 Cases concerning documentation and communications passing between the EPO and the parties
  10. d) Period set for opponent to reply to patentee's response
Print
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email

11.6.17 Cases concerning documentation and communications passing between the EPO and the parties

Overview

d) Period set for opponent to reply to patentee's response

In T 138/08 the appellant (opponent) complained that two months and 21 days was not sufficient time to reply to the patentee's observations filed in response to the opposition. The board observed that the communication of the observations of the patentee had been made merely for information and the opposition division and had not raised any matter of substance in the communication. For that simple act a period of two months was considered sufficient. Therefore, the reimbursement of the appeal fee under R. 103(1)(a) EPC was not justified.

Previous
Next
Footer - Service & support
  • Service & support
    • Website updates
    • Availability of online services
    • FAQ
    • Publications
    • Procedural communications
    • Contact us
    • Subscription centre
    • Official holidays
    • Glossary
Footer - More links
  • Jobs & careers
  • Press centre
  • Single Access Portal
  • Procurement
  • Boards of Appeal
Facebook
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
Instagram
EuropeanPatentOffice
Linkedin
European Patent Office
EPO Jobs
EPO Procurement
X (formerly Twitter)
EPOorg
EPOjobs
Youtube
TheEPO
Footer
  • Legal notice
  • Terms of use
  • Data protection and privacy
  • Accessibility