G 1/11: a new referral, but don't get excited

Miggy struggled to contain her excitement
as she considered the awesome prospect
of G 1/11 ...
While the recent decision G 2/10 from the European Patent Office's Enlarged Board of Appeal is complex and technical, at least it has the merit of addressing a practical question which confronts applicants and their representatives from time to time. (In case you missed yesterday's post, the Enlarged Board answered the question of whether you can disclaim an embodiment of your patent application without adding subject-matter, with an authoritative "sometimes").

The latest referral to the Enlarged Board of Appeal - G 1/11 - poses a question which is going to register many notches lower on the interest scale for everyone, other than a small number of EPO officials.  Contain your excitement as you savour the issue at stake, summarised in the IPKat's unofficial translation:
"Should an appeal against a decision of an Examining Division, refusing the refund of search fees under R.64 (2) EPC, which is not related to a decision to grant a European patent or to refuse a European patent application, be handled by a Technical Board of Appeal or the Legal Board of Appeal?"
While the referring decision J 21/09 is currently available in German only, the file history shows that the appeal was assigned initially to a Technical Board of Appeal and then bounced to the Legal Board, which presumably doubted its own jurisdiction sufficiently to make the referral.

The outcome of this referral will have a practical effect on where future appeals end up but, since this is a matter which is out of the hands of applicants anyway, the eventual decision will likely be of academic interest (if even that) to everyone who is not a Registrar of an EPO Appeal Board.

(Thanks to the anonymous commenter on yesterday's post who mentioned this referral).
G 1/11: a new referral, but don't get excited G 1/11: a new referral, but don't get excited Reviewed by David Brophy on Monday, September 05, 2011 Rating: 5


  1. Welcome to the IPKat David! Shame you had such a dull case to get you started.

  2. Those who look for a full translation can find it here:



All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.