I85PREP
⌘ K
EPAC study materials
EPAC study resources

EPAC practice questions

One question at a time. Build your EPAC understanding.

First 50 of 190 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under the Paris Convention, what is the priority period for filing a subsequent patent application claiming priority from an earlier utility model or patent application?

  1. 6 months
  2. 18 months
  3. 12 months Correct answer.
  4. 24 months

Explanation

According to Article 4C(1) of the Paris Convention, the priority period for patents and utility models is 12 months. This period starts from the date of filing of the first application.

Question 2EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

For a subsequent European patent application to validly claim priority from an earlier application under the EPC, who must file the subsequent application?

  1. Any person who files the subsequent application, regardless of relationship to the original applicant.
  2. The professional representative of the first applicant only.
  3. Only the actual inventor of the subject matter, even if the first application was filed by a company.
  4. The applicant of the first application or their successor in title. Correct answer.

Explanation

Article 87(1) EPC states that the right of priority belongs to the person who has duly filed the first application, or their successor in title. If the applicant of the subsequent application is not the original applicant, a valid transfer of the priority right must have taken place before the filing of the subsequent application.

Question 3EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following languages is NOT an official language of the European Patent Office (EPO)?

  1. English
  2. Spanish Correct answer.
  3. German
  4. French

Explanation

According to Article 14(1) EPC, the official languages of the European Patent Office are English, French, and German. Spanish is not an official language of the EPO, although applications can be filed in any language under certain conditions.

Question 4EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If a European patent application is filed in an official language of an EPC contracting state that is not English, French, or German, what is the deadline for filing the translation into one of the official languages of the EPO?

  1. 1 month from the filing date
  2. 3 months from the filing date
  3. 2 months from the filing date Correct answer.
  4. 6 months from the filing date

Explanation

According to Rule 6(1) EPC, if a European patent application is filed in a language other than English, French, or German, a translation into one of these official languages must be filed within two months of the filing date.

Question 5EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Who is entitled to a reduction in the filing fee under the EPC for filing a patent application in a non-EPO official language?

  1. Only natural persons.
  2. Natural persons, SMEs, non-profit organizations, universities, and public research organizations. Correct answer.
  3. Only small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
  4. Any applicant, regardless of entity type or residence.

Explanation

Rule 6(4) EPC, in conjunction with Rule 6(3) EPC, limits the fee reduction (currently 30%) for filing in an authorized non-EPO language to natural persons, SMEs, non-profit organizations, universities, and public research organizations having their residence or principal place of business in an EPC contracting state with a language other than English, French, or German.

Question 6EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the primary document required to identify the inventor in a European patent application?

  1. A formal designation of inventor filed on EPO Form 1202 or within the request for grant. Correct answer.
  2. A certified copy of the inventor's passport.
  3. An affidavit signed by all joint applicants.
  4. A declaration of priority document.

Explanation

According to Article 81 and Rule 19(1) EPC, the applicant must designate the inventor. This is typically done in the Request for Grant form (Form 1001) or by filing a separate designation of inventor form (Form 1202).

Question 7EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following is explicitly excluded from patentability under Article 52(2) EPC when claimed 'as such'?

  1. Schemes, rules, and methods for performing mental acts, playing games, or doing business. Correct answer.
  2. Chemical substances.
  3. Microbiological processes.
  4. Medical devices.

Explanation

Article 52(2)(c) EPC explicitly excludes schemes, rules, and methods for performing mental acts, playing games, or doing business, as well as programs for computers, from patentability to the extent that the application relates to such subject-matter 'as such'.

Question 8EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

According to Article 54(2) EPC, what constitutes the state of the art for determining the novelty of an invention?

  1. Everything made available to the public by means of a written or oral description, by use, or in any other way, before the date of filing of the European patent application. Correct answer.
  2. Only documents published in the official languages of the EPO.
  3. Only patent applications filed in EPC contracting states in the last 20 years.
  4. Any scientific publication in a peer-reviewed journal only.

Explanation

Article 54(2) EPC defines the state of the art as comprising everything made available to the public by means of a written or oral description, by use, or in any other way, before the date of filing of the European patent application (or its priority date). This is an absolute novelty standard with no geographical or language limits.

Question 9EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under what condition does a co-pending European patent application constitute state of the art under Article 54(3) EPC for a later application?

  1. Only if it was published before the filing date of the later application.
  2. Only if both applications have the same applicant.
  3. If its filing date (or priority date) is earlier than that of the later application, and it was published on or after the filing/priority date of the later application. Correct answer.
  4. If it was filed in the same contracting state as the later application's applicant resides.

Explanation

Article 54(3) EPC states that the content of European patent applications as filed, of which the dates of filing are prior to the date of filing of the later application and which were published on or after that date, shall be considered as comprised in the state of the art. These documents are considered for novelty only, not for inventive step.

Question 10EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Article 55 EPC (non-prejudicial disclosures), how long is the grace period for a disclosure of the invention that was due to an evident abuse in relation to the applicant?

  1. 3 months preceding the filing date of the application.
  2. 12 months preceding the filing date of the application.
  3. 6 months preceding the filing date of the application. Correct answer.
  4. 24 months preceding the filing date of the application.

Explanation

Article 55(1) EPC states that a disclosure of the invention shall not be taken into consideration if it occurred no earlier than six months preceding the filing of the European patent application and was due to, or in consequence of, an evident abuse in relation to the applicant or their legal predecessor.

Question 11EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the statutory standard for determining whether an invention involves an inventive step under Article 56 EPC?

  1. It must not be obvious to a person skilled in the art, having regard to the state of the art. Correct answer.
  2. It must be completely new to the applicant.
  3. It must represent a significant leap in industrial productivity.
  4. It must be verified by a prototype.

Explanation

Article 56 EPC defines inventive step: an invention shall be considered as involving an inventive step if, having regard to the state of the art, it is not obvious to a person skilled in the art. This is evaluated using the EPO's 'problem-solution approach'.

Question 12EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

According to Article 60(1) EPC, to whom does the right to a European patent belong?

  1. To the first person who files the patent application, regardless of who invented it.
  2. To the inventor or to his successor in title. Correct answer.
  3. To the European Patent Office.
  4. To the state where the invention was made.

Explanation

Article 60(1) EPC states that the right to a European patent shall belong to the inventor or to his successor in title. If the inventor is an employee, the right is determined in accordance with the law of the State in which the employee is mainly employed.

Question 13EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which applicants are required under Article 133(2) EPC to be represented by a professional representative in all proceedings before the EPO?

  1. All applicants, without exception.
  2. Applicants who file in a language other than English, French, or German.
  3. Only corporate entities, while natural persons can always represent themselves.
  4. Natural or legal persons not having their residence or principal place of business in an EPC contracting state. Correct answer.

Explanation

According to Article 133(2) EPC, natural or legal persons not having their residence or principal place of business in an EPC contracting state must be represented by a professional representative and act through him in all proceedings established by the EPC, except for filing the application itself.

Question 14EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the effect if a professional representative fails to file a signed authorization within the period specified by the EPO?

  1. The application is immediately deemed withdrawn.
  2. The application is transferred to another representative.
  3. A fine is automatically levied on the applicant.
  4. The representative's procedural steps are deemed not to have been taken. Correct answer.

Explanation

According to Rule 152(6) EPC, if a representative is required to file an authorization (either individual or reference to a general authorization) and fails to do so in due time, any procedural steps taken by the representative, other than filing the European patent application, are deemed not to have been taken.

Question 15EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following is an authorized method of filing a European patent application?

  1. Via telephone call to the EPO customer service.
  2. Online filing using the EPO Online Filing (OLF) software or MyEPO Portfolio. Correct answer.
  3. Sending an email directly to the EPO President.
  4. Sending text messages to the EPO registry.

Explanation

European patent applications can be filed electronically using the EPO Online Filing (OLF) software, Online Filing 2.0, or the MyEPO Portfolio portal. Filing can also be done by post or hand delivery at the EPO filing offices (Munich, The Hague, Berlin).

Question 16EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

To register the transfer of a European patent application in the European Patent Register, what must be submitted to the EPO?

  1. A simple notification email from the representative.
  2. Documentary evidence proving the transfer (such as an assignment document signed by both parties) and payment of the administrative fee. Correct answer.
  3. A copy of the applicant's board minutes authorizing the transfer.
  4. An oral declaration at a public hearing.

Explanation

Under Rule 22(1) EPC, the transfer of a European patent application is recorded in the European Patent Register upon request, supported by documentary evidence proving the transfer (such as a signed assignment contract) and after payment of the administrative fee.

Question 17EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the difference between an EPC contracting state and a validation state?

  1. Contracting states are members of the European Patent Organisation, while validation states are non-member states that have concluded validation agreements with the Organisation. Correct answer.
  2. Validation states are automatic members of the EPC, whereas contracting states require an act of Parliament.
  3. Validation states do not allow translation requirements, whereas contracting states do.
  4. There is no difference; they are synonymous terms.

Explanation

Contracting states (currently 39) are members of the European Patent Organisation under the EPC. Validation states (such as Morocco, Moldova, Tunisia, Cambodia, and Georgia) are non-member states where the effects of a European patent application and patent can be extended upon request and payment of the validation fee.

Question 18EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Rule 136(1) EPC, what is the deadline for filing a request for re-establishment of rights (restitutio in integrum) following the omission of a time limit?

  1. Within 2 months of the removal of the cause of non-compliance, but no later than 1 year from the expiry of the unobserved time limit. Correct answer.
  2. Within 1 month of the removal of the cause of non-compliance, but no later than 6 months from the expired deadline.
  3. Within 3 months of the notification of loss of rights.
  4. Within 6 months from the date of the unobserved time limit, with no extension possible.

Explanation

Rule 136(1) EPC requires that a request for re-establishment of rights be filed within two months of the removal of the cause of non-compliance, and the omitted act must be completed within this period. The request is only admissible within one year from the expiry of the unobserved time limit.

Question 19EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

According to Article 88(2) EPC, is it permissible to claim multiple priorities for a single claim in a European patent application?

  1. No, a claim can only claim priority from a single earlier application.
  2. Yes, multiple priorities may be claimed for any single claim, provided that there are corresponding multiple disclosures in the priority documents. Correct answer.
  3. Yes, but only if the priority applications were filed in the same country.
  4. Yes, but only if the applicant pays an additional multiple-priority fee.

Explanation

Article 88(2) EPC states that, where appropriate, multiple priorities may be claimed for any one claim. If multiple priorities are claimed, the time limits which run from the date of priority run from the earliest date of priority.

Question 20EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the consequence of withdrawing a priority claim during the European phase of a patent application?

  1. The application is automatically deemed withdrawn.
  2. The priority date is no longer used, and the effective date of the application shifts to the actual filing date, which recalculates subsequent deadlines. Correct answer.
  3. The applicant must pay a priority reinstatement fee.
  4. It has no effect on subsequent deadlines.

Explanation

If a priority claim is withdrawn, the priority date is lost. As a result, subsequent deadlines that run from the priority date (such as the 18-month publication deadline) will be calculated from the next earliest priority date, or from the actual filing date if no priority remains.

Question 21EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the time limit for correcting or adding a priority claim under Rule 52(3) EPC?

  1. Within 1 month of the filing date.
  2. Within 16 months of the earliest priority date claimed (or, if the correction/addition causes a change, 16 months from the corrected earliest priority date). Correct answer.
  3. At any time before the application is granted.
  4. Only within the 12-month priority window.

Explanation

Rule 52(3) EPC states that the applicant may add or correct a priority claim within 16 months from the earliest priority date claimed, or, if the correction/addition causes a change in the earliest priority date, within 16 months from the corrected earliest priority date, whichever period expires first, provided the request is filed before publication.

Question 22EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following is a mandatory requirement for identifying an applicant in the request for grant of a European patent?

  1. The applicant's name, address, and nationality (or state of incorporation/residence). Correct answer.
  2. A copy of the applicant's birth certificate (for natural persons).
  3. A list of the applicant's other pending patent applications.
  4. A signature from a notary public.

Explanation

Rule 41(2)(c) EPC requires that the request for grant contain the name, address, nationality, and the State in which the applicant's residence or principal place of business is located. This is essential for determining representation requirements and fee reductions.

Question 23EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If an invention is made by an employee in an EPC contracting state, how is the ownership of the right to the European patent determined?

  1. It always belongs to the employer under the EPC.
  2. It is determined in accordance with the national law of the State in which the employee is mainly employed. Correct answer.
  3. It always belongs to the employee under the EPC.
  4. It is split 50/50 between employer and employee by default.

Explanation

According to Article 60(1) EPC, if the inventor is an employee, the right to the European patent shall be determined in accordance with the law of the State in which the employee is mainly employed; if the State of main employment cannot be determined, the law of the State in which the employer has the place of business to which the employee is attached shall apply.

Question 24EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If a European patent application is filed by two or more joint applicants, how must they act in proceedings before the EPO if they have not appointed a common representative?

  1. Each applicant can take any procedural step independently.
  2. They must all sign every single letter sent to the EPO.
  3. The application is rejected for lack of a single representative.
  4. The first applicant named in the request for grant is deemed to be the common representative. Correct answer.

Explanation

Under Rule 151(1) EPC, if there is more than one applicant and they have not appointed a common representative, the applicant first named in the request for grant shall be deemed to be the common representative. Only the common representative is authorized to act on behalf of all applicants.

Question 25EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

To claim priority from an earlier exhibition disclosure under Article 55(1)(b) EPC, what must the applicant file and when?

  1. A photo of the exhibition booth within 1 year of filing.
  2. An oral statement by the applicant at the time of filing.
  3. A certificate issued during the exhibition by the authority responsible for industrial property protection, within 4 months of filing the application. Correct answer.
  4. A signed letter from the exhibition organizer within 6 months of filing.

Explanation

Rule 25 EPC states that an applicant who wishes to claim the benefit of Article 55(1)(b) (disclosure at an officially recognized exhibition) must file, within four months of filing the application, a certificate issued during the exhibition by the authority responsible for industrial property protection at the exhibition.

Question 26EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following elements is NOT strictly required to establish a date of filing for a European patent application under Rule 40(1) EPC?

  1. An indication that a European patent is sought.
  2. Information identifying the applicant.
  3. A description or a reference to a previously filed application.
  4. At least one claim. Correct answer.

Explanation

According to Rule 40(1) EPC, the requirements for a date of filing are: an indication that a European patent is sought, information identifying the applicant, and a description (or a reference to a previously filed application). Claims are not required to obtain a date of filing (though they must be filed later).

Question 27EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the standard time limit for paying the filing fee and the search fee after filing a European patent application?

  1. 2 months
  2. 1 month Correct answer.
  3. 3 months
  4. 6 months

Explanation

Under Rule 38(1) EPC (filing fee) and Rule 17(2) EPC (search fee), the filing fee and search fee must be paid within one month of filing the European patent application.

Question 28EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

How many claims can be included in a European patent application without paying any additional claims fees?

  1. 10 claims
  2. 30 claims
  3. 20 claims
  4. 15 claims Correct answer.

Explanation

According to Rule 45(1) EPC, any European patent application containing more than 15 claims at the time of filing triggers claims fees. Thus, the first 15 claims are free of claims fees.

Question 29EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If the claims fees for the 16th and subsequent claims are not paid upon filing the European application, what is the consequence?

  1. The application is immediately deemed withdrawn.
  2. The excess claims are automatically deleted by the EPO without notice.
  3. The EPO issues a communication inviting the applicant to pay the fees within a grace period of one month, failing which the affected claims are deemed abandoned. Correct answer.
  4. The applicant must pay a double fee immediately.

Explanation

Under Rule 45(2) EPC, if claims fees are not paid in due time, they may still be paid within a grace period of one month after notification of a communication pointing out the failure. If they are not paid within this grace period, the corresponding claims are deemed to be abandoned.

Question 30EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What happens to the filing date of a European application if the applicant files missing parts of the description or drawings under Rule 56 EPC, and these parts are NOT completely contained in a priority document?

  1. The filing date remains unchanged.
  2. The application is rejected.
  3. The date of filing is re-dated to the date on which the missing parts were filed. Correct answer.
  4. The missing parts are ignored and not added to the application.

Explanation

Under Rule 56(2) and (3) EPC, if missing parts of the description or drawings are filed and are not completely contained in a priority document, the application is re-dated to the date on which the missing parts were received at the EPO.

Question 31EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If a divisional application is filed, what is the deadline for filing its translation if the parent application was filed in a non-EPO official language?

  1. 1 month from filing the divisional application.
  2. 3 months from filing the divisional application.
  3. 2 months from filing the divisional application. Correct answer.
  4. 6 months from filing the divisional application.

Explanation

Rule 36(2) EPC states that the translation of the divisional application must be filed within two months of filing the divisional application, if it is filed in a language other than English, French, or German.

Question 32EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Article 94(1) and Rule 70(1) EPC, what is the deadline for filing the request for examination and paying the examination fee?

  1. At any time up to the issuance of the intention to grant.
  2. Within 12 months of the filing date.
  3. Within 18 months of the priority date.
  4. Within 6 months of the date on which the European Patent Bulletin mentions the publication of the European search report. Correct answer.

Explanation

Article 94(1) EPC and Rule 70(1) EPC state that the request for examination must be filed and the fee paid within six months of the date on which the European Patent Bulletin mentions the publication of the European search report.

Question 33EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

For a divisional application, what is the time limit for filing the request for examination and paying the examination fee if the parent's search report has already been published?

  1. Within 6 months of the date of filing of the divisional application. Correct answer.
  2. 6 months from the publication of the parent application's search report.
  3. Within 3 months of filing the divisional application.
  4. At any time before the parent application is granted.

Explanation

According to Rule 70(1) EPC in conjunction with Rule 36(3) EPC, if the European search report on the parent application has already been published before the divisional is filed, the request for examination for the divisional application must be filed within six months of the date of filing of the divisional application.

Question 34EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Rule 132 EPC, how can a time limit specified by the European Patent Office be extended?

  1. By filing a written request before the expiry of the period. Correct answer.
  2. By paying a fee without making a request.
  3. By ignoring the deadline and filing a request for further processing later.
  4. EPO-specified periods cannot be extended under any circumstances.

Explanation

According to Rule 132(2) EPC, a time limit specified by the EPO may be extended if a request to that effect is filed before the expiry of the period. For most standard communications, a first extension of up to 2 months is granted automatically without needing to show reasons.

Question 35EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Which of the following time limits is EXCLUDED from further processing under Article 121 and Rule 135(2) EPC?

  1. The period for replying to an Article 94(3) EPC examination communication.
  2. The period for filing a request for further processing itself. Correct answer.
  3. The period for replying to the search opinion.
  4. The period for designating the inventor.

Explanation

Rule 135(2) EPC explicitly excludes certain time limits from further processing. These include the time limit for further processing itself, the time limit for requesting re-establishment of rights, the priority period, and the time limit for filing an appeal or opposition.

Question 36EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the time limit for filing a request for further processing under Rule 135(1) EPC?

  1. Within 1 month of the unobserved time limit.
  2. Within 6 months of the unobserved time limit.
  3. Within 2 months of the notification of the communication of the loss of rights. Correct answer.
  4. At any time before the patent is granted.

Explanation

Rule 135(1) EPC states that the request for further processing must be filed within two months of the notification of the communication of the loss of rights. Within this period, the omitted act must be completed and the further processing fee must be paid.

Question 37EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the consequence under Rule 134(1) EPC if a time limit expires on a day on which one of the filing offices of the EPO is not open for receipt of documents?

  1. The application is deemed withdrawn and must be reinstated via further processing.
  2. The applicant must file the document via fax on that day.
  3. The time limit is extended to the first day on which all the filing offices are open for receipt of documents. Correct answer.
  4. The time limit is shortened to the preceding working day.

Explanation

Rule 134(1) EPC provides that if a time limit expires on a day on which one of the filing offices of the EPO is not open for receipt of documents, or on which mail is not delivered, the time limit is extended to the first day on which all the filing offices are open and mail is delivered.

Question 38EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under standard EPO practice, what is the default time limit set by the Examining Division in a communication under Article 94(3) EPC for replying to objections?

  1. 2 months
  2. 6 months
  3. 4 months Correct answer.
  4. 9 months

Explanation

According to the EPO Guidelines for Examination, the standard time limit set by the Examining Division for replying to an Article 94(3) communication is 4 months. For simple matters, it may be 2 months, and in exceptional cases, up to 6 months.

Question 39EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

In order for a request to extend an EPO-specified time limit to be validly granted under Rule 132 EPC, when must it be submitted?

  1. Before the expiry of the time limit in question. Correct answer.
  2. Within 2 months after the expiry of the deadline.
  3. At the time of filing the response.
  4. Only when paying the extension fee.

Explanation

Rule 132(2) EPC states that a time limit may be extended if a request to that effect is filed before the expiry of the period. If the deadline has already expired, the extension cannot be granted, and the applicant must rely on further processing instead.

Question 40EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the time limit for performing the acts required under Rule 71(3) EPC (paying the grant and publishing fees, and filing translations of the claims) after notification of the communication of intention to grant?

  1. 2 months
  2. 4 months Correct answer.
  3. 3 months
  4. 6 months

Explanation

Rule 71(3) EPC states that the applicant must pay the fee for grant and publishing and file a translation of the claims in the two official languages of the EPO other than the language of the proceedings within a non-extendable period of four months.

Question 41EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Rule 137(1) EPC, is the applicant permitted to amend the description, claims, or drawings of a European patent application before receiving the European search report?

  1. Yes, at any time.
  2. No, unless the amendment is in response to a correction of an obvious error or omission. Correct answer.
  3. Yes, but only by paying an amendment fee.
  4. Yes, but only to reduce the number of claims.

Explanation

Rule 137(1) EPC states that the applicant may not amend the description, claims, or drawings of a European patent application before receiving the European search report, unless otherwise provided (such as correcting obvious errors under Rule 139 EPC).

Question 42EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

According to Rule 137(2) EPC, when can the applicant file amendments to the application of their own volition (voluntary amendments) after receiving the European search report?

  1. Together with, or after, the reply to the communication of the search opinion, up to the first communication from the Examining Division. Correct answer.
  2. Only within 1 month of the search report.
  3. Only after the grant decision has been drafted.
  4. Never; all amendments must be requested by the examiner.

Explanation

Rule 137(2) EPC states that the applicant may, of their own volition, amend the description, claims, and drawings when replying to the search opinion, and also after receipt of the first communication from the Examining Division.

Question 43EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

For any amendments filed after the first communication from the Examining Division, whose consent is required under Rule 137(3) EPC?

  1. The consent of the WIPO International Bureau.
  2. The consent of all joint applicants only.
  3. The consent of the Examining Division. Correct answer.
  4. No consent is required; amendments are always a matter of right.

Explanation

Rule 137(3) EPC states that after the first communication from the Examining Division, no further amendment may be made without the consent of the Examining Division. The Division exercises its discretion by considering factors like relevance and procedural economy.

Question 44EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If a European patent application is deemed withdrawn due to a failure to meet a time limit, what notification does the EPO send to the applicant?

  1. A communication of loss of rights under Rule 112(1) EPC. Correct answer.
  2. A telephone call from the primary examiner.
  3. A formal court summons.
  4. A public notice in the EPO Official Journal.

Explanation

Under Rule 112(1) EPC, if the EPO notes that a loss of rights (such as the application being deemed withdrawn) has occurred, it shall communicate this to the person concerned. This starts the clock for further processing or other remedies.

Question 45EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

When are renewal fees for a European patent application due for payment to the EPO?

  1. On the anniversary of the priority date.
  2. On the last day of the month containing the anniversary of the date of filing of the European patent application, starting from the 3rd year. Correct answer.
  3. Within 1 month of filing the application.
  4. Only after the patent has been granted.

Explanation

According to Rule 51(1) EPC, renewal fees for the European patent application must be paid to the EPO in respect of the third and each subsequent year. They are due on the last day of the month containing the anniversary of the date of filing.

Question 46EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

If a renewal fee is not paid on or before the due date, what is the grace period and the associated additional fee under Rule 51(2) EPC?

  1. 1 month with a 10% surcharge.
  2. 2 months with a 25% surcharge.
  3. There is no grace period for renewal fees.
  4. 6 months with a 50% additional fee. Correct answer.

Explanation

Rule 51(2) EPC provides a six-month grace period for the late payment of a renewal fee, provided that the renewal fee and an additional fee (which is 50% of the renewal fee) are paid within this period.

Question 47EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

How early can a renewal fee for a European patent application be validly pre-paid before it becomes due under Rule 51(1) EPC?

  1. At any time from the filing date.
  2. Up to 3 months before it becomes due. Correct answer.
  3. Only 1 month before it becomes due.
  4. Renewal fees cannot be paid before the due date.

Explanation

Rule 51(1) EPC (as amended) states that renewal fees may not be validly paid more than three months before they become due. Any payment made earlier is not valid and will be refunded.

Question 48EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under what circumstance can the search fee paid for a European application be fully or partially refunded under the Rules relating to Fees?

  1. Only if the application is granted within 1 year.
  2. If the applicant complains about the quality of the search report.
  3. If the application is withdrawn, refused, or deemed withdrawn before the EPO has started drawing up the search report. Correct answer.
  4. Search fees are never refundable.

Explanation

According to Article 9(2) of the Rules relating to Fees, the search fee shall be refunded in full if the European patent application is withdrawn, refused, or deemed withdrawn before the EPO has started drawing up the search report. A partial refund (usually 50% or 75%) may occur if the EPO can make use of an earlier search report.

Question 49EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

Under Rule 139 EPC, what is the standard for correcting errors in documents filed with the European Patent Office?

  1. The correction must be obvious in the sense that it is immediately evident that nothing else could have been intended than what is offered as the correction. Correct answer.
  2. Any correction is allowed at any time, even if it introduces new subject-matter.
  3. Corrections must be certified by a notary public.
  4. Corrections are only allowed if a fee of €500 is paid.

Explanation

Rule 139 EPC states that linguistic errors, errors of transcription, and mistakes in any document filed with the EPO may be corrected. However, if the request for correction concerns the description, claims, or drawings, the correction must be obvious: it must be immediately evident that nothing else could have been intended than what is offered as the correction.

Question 50EPAC: European patent administration and procedural accountability

What is the legal effect of the abolition of the 10-day notification rule (former Rule 126(2) EPC) on November 1, 2023?

  1. EPO communications are now deemed to be delivered on their actual date of transmission, and deadlines run from that date. Correct answer.
  2. All deadlines are shortened by exactly 10 days.
  3. Communications are only sent via paper post.
  4. No notifications are sent; applicants must check the register daily.

Explanation

Effective November 1, 2023, the EPO abolished the '10-day rule' under Rule 126(2) EPC. Under the new rule, a document is deemed delivered on the actual date it was transmitted (either electronically or via post), and the deadline runs from that transmission date. If there is a dispute, the EPO bears the burden of proving delivery.