tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8990057754240336385.post3645306398258886669..comments2024-02-27T09:18:36.160+01:00Comments on DeltaPatents Case Law blog: J 0010/12 - The time (limits) they aren't a-changin'DeltaPatentshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07830354704918972593noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8990057754240336385.post-16783356548765874502014-10-12T12:39:02.796+02:002014-10-12T12:39:02.796+02:00Well, re-establishement was available for the 24-m...Well, re-establishement was available for the 24-months periods of R36(1)(a) and (b) (old). On second thought, I wonder whether the application will not be treated as an application at all (hence a refund of at least the filing fee), or is treated as a normal application. G1/05 seems to forbid a different kind of conversion of a divisional into a normal application because of extension of subject-matter. The Guidelines do not seem to address this scenario of late filing of an intended divisional.PJZZnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8990057754240336385.post-87811714706138234202014-10-11T17:01:35.094+02:002014-10-11T17:01:35.094+02:00I think I agree that, strictly speaking, the filer...I think I agree that, strictly speaking, the filer is not an applicant. But he is a party to the proceedings leading to the decision of the receiving section, so (being negatively affected by the decision) is entitled to appeal (Art. 107 EPC).<br /><br />Maybe the EPO could have argued that re-establishment is not available to non-applicants? That could have simplified the decision quite a bit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8990057754240336385.post-11913906098106442892014-10-08T21:59:33.541+02:002014-10-08T21:59:33.541+02:00I wonder whether the decision is anonymised becaus...I wonder whether the decision is anonymised because the divisional will not be published, since it is not treated as a divisional application, hence not as an application. Accordingly, file inspection is not available. The somewhat curious aspect is that the filer is nevertheless an applicant and can appeal. PJZZnoreply@blogger.com