IP Law News

European patent - Examination as to formal requirements

According to Rule 57 and other rules of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR),


 

If the European patent application has been accorded a date of filing, the European Patent Office shall examine, in accordance with Article 90, paragraph 3, of the EPC, whether:

(a)

European patent application - Missing parts of the description or missing drawings

According to Rule 56 and other rules of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR),

(1)

European patent - Examination on filing

According to Rule 55 and other rules of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR),

European patent - Issuing priority documents

 

According to Rule 54 and other rules of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR),

 

the applicant can require from the European Patent Office issuance of certified copy of the European Patent Application ( priority document)..

 

European patent - Priority documents

According to Rule 53 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR) ,

(1)
An applicant claiming priority shall file a copy of the previous application within sixteen months of the earliest priority date claimed. This copy and the date of filing of the previous application shall be certified as correct by the authority with which that application was filed.

European patent - Declaration of priority

According to Rule 52 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR)

European patent - Payment of renewal fees, Part 2

According to Rule 51 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR)

(3)

European patent - Prohibited matter in the patent application

According to Rule 48 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) Implementing Regulations (IR)

(1)

The European patent application shall not contain: 

 

(a)

statements or other matter contrary to "ordre public" or morality; 

(b)

statements disparaging the products or processes of any third party or the merits or validity of the applications or patents of any such party. Mere comparisons with the prior art shall not be considered disparaging per se; 

(c)

Pages

Subscribe to IP Law News