Advent Calendar 2025 - Answers
Starting on 1 December 2025, you can follow the 5th EQE Advent Calendar on Fillun’s LinkedIn page. In this post, you can find the answers to the quiz questions of the Advent Calendar.
1. A Spanish company and a Japanese natural person living in the US jointly file an international application. How many competent receiving Offices can the applicants choose from? (single choice)
❌ A. 2
❌ B. 3
❌ C. 4
✅ D. 5
Answer: 5 competent rOs
Spanish patent office
EPO
Japanese patent office
USPTO (US patent office)
IB
2. An international application was filed on 4 July 2025 without claiming priority. The description refers to drawings, but none are included. The drawings are submitted on 20 July 2025.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. The international filing date remains 4 July 2025.
✅ B. The international filing date will become 20 July 2025.
❌ C. The international filing date can remain 4 July 2025 if the applicant adds a declaration to priority to an earlier application which contained the same drawings, at the latest when the missing drawings are filed.
❌ D. It is not possible to file the drawings later, so they will be disregarded.
✅ E. In case the receiving Office does not notice the missing drawings, the latest day to file them is 4 September 2025.
Answer: Filing missing drawings is possible under Rule 20.5(a) PCT. The filing date will change to the date when the rO receives the missing part under Rule 20.5(c) PCT. Incorporation by reference under R.20.6 PCT is not possible as priority was not claimed on the date of filing. Time limit is indeed 2 months from 4 July 2025, legal basis: Rule 20.7(a)(ii) PCT.
3. EPO as receiving Office issues a Rule 16bis.1 PCT communication dated 1 December 2025 inviting the applicant to pay the international filing fee, search fee and transmittal fee.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. The fees can also be paid to the IB.
✅ B. The applicant has to pay these fees no later than 2 January 2026 together with a late payment fee.
❌ C. If the fees are still not paid in response to this invitation, it is possible to request further processing by paying the 150% of the fees.
❌ D. The fees can also be paid within 2 months of the date of receipt of the application if that time limit expires later.
✅ E. It might still be sufficient to pay the fees one day after the time limit set in the Rule 16bis.1 PCT invitation to avoid the deemed withdrawal of the application.
Answer: Legal basis and the 1-m time limit for the invitation can be found in Rule 16bis.1(a) PCT. Rule 16bis.2 PCT covers the late payment fee. E is true, see Rule 16bis.1(e) PCT
4. (EPAC question) Company M, which has its principal place of business in Tijuana, Mexico, validly filed an international patent application PCT-M with the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property. The application was filed in Spanish. A few days later, the applicant files an English translation of the application.
Which of the following statements is correct? (single choice)
❌ A. The applicant can choose the EPO as ISA and the USPTO as IPEA.
❌ B. The applicant can choose the USPTO as ISA and the EPO as IPEA.
✅ C. The applicant can choose the Austrian Patent Office as ISA and the EPO as IPEA.
❌ D. The applicant can choose the EPO as ISA and the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore as IPEA.
Answer:
A: USPTO only acts as IPEA if it was ISA too.
B: EPO does not act IPEA if the ISA was not European.
D: False, Singapore only acts as IPEA if it was ISA too.
5. The filing date of a national application is 2 March 2024. An international application claiming priority from the national application is filed at the EPO on 10 April 2025. By when must the request for restoration of the right of priority be filed at the EPO as rO? (single choice)
❌ 3 March 2025 Monday
❌ 2 May 2025 Friday
❌ 5 May 2025 Monday
✅ 6 May 2025 Tuesday
❌ 10 June 2025 Tuesday
Answer: Time limit is two months from the date on which the priority period expired - Rule 26bis.3(e) PCT, so:
2 March 2024 + 12 months –> 2 March 2025 Sunday –> 3 March 2025 Monday
3 March 2025 + 2 months –> 3 May 2025 Saturday, then 5 May 2025 is Liberation Day –> 6 May 2025 Tuesday
6. For a Euro-PCT application to be considered a prior right under Art.54(3) EPC, it is required that: (Multiple choice)
✅ A. The application was published in EN/DE/FR or an EN/DE/FR translation was filed with the EPO.
❌ B. All steps of R.159(1) EPC were completed.
❌ C. The application is pending before the EPO (in the EP phase).
✅ D. The filing fee under R.159(1)(c) EPC was paid.
❌ E. The designation fee under R.159(1)(d) EPC was paid.
Answer: For prior-right effect, only translation + filing fee suffice. Other acts (e.g. search fee, designation fee, examination request) are only needed for the application to proceed to examination, not to exist as a prior right. - Art.153(5) and R.165 EPC.
The Euro-PCT application can form a prior right even if it is deemed to be withdrawn as of the expiry of the 31-month period. - GL G-IV, 5.2
7. A US, a Brazilian and a Serbian natural person jointly file an international application in Portuguese at the EPO. Which office will act as receiving Office?
❌ A. EPO
✅ B. IB
❌ C. USPTO
❌ D. Brazilian patent office
Answer: IB, as the the international application is transmitted to the IB under R.19.4(a)(ii) PCT. The EPO only accepts EN/DE/FR as receiving Office.
8. A declaration of no search is issued by the ISA under Art.17(2)(a) PCT on 10 December 2025. The priority date of the international application is 15 September 2024.
By when may the applicant file amended claims under Art. 19 PCT? (single choice)
❌ A. 12 January 2026 (Monday)
❌ B. 15 January 2026 (Thursday)
❌ C. 10 February 2026 (Tuesday)
✅ D. None of the above (for any reasons).
Answer: 2 months from transmittal = 10 Feb 2026;
16 months from priority = 15 Jan 2026
However, if there is no search, no Art.19 amendments can be filed. - AG-IP 9.004
9. An international application is filed in Korean on 10 January 2024.
Which statement(s) is/are correct for third party observations filed in the international phase?
❌ A. Third party observations can be filed after the application is published and on 10 July 2026 the latest.
❌ B. Third party observations can be filed without citing prior art document, for example by addressing clarity issues in the claims of the international application.
✅ C. Third party observations have to be filed in one of the ten languages of publication.
❌ D. Third party observations have to be filed in the language the application is published, i.e. in Korean.
✅ E. The applicant may comment on the observations in English, French or the language in which the international application is published, i.e. in Korean.
Answer: Third party observations may be submitted at any time after the date of publication of the international application and before the expiration of 28 months from the priority date, provided that the application is not withdrawn or considered withdrawn. - AG-IP 11.110 (10 July 2026 would be 30 months from the priority date.)
Each observation must include at least one citation that refers to a document published before the international filing date, or a patent document having a priority date before the international filing date, together with a brief explanation of how each document is considered to be relevant to the questions of novelty and/or inventive step of the claimed invention. - AG-IP 11.111
Observations should be submitted in a language of publication, with the exception that copies of prior art documents may be in any language. - AG-IP 11.113
The applicant’s comments should be submitted in English, French or the language of publication of the international application. - AG-IP 11.114
10. An international application was filed in English, with the exception of the drawings, which contained text in Hungarian. Does the text matter in the drawings have to be translated?
(multiple choice)
✅ A. Yes, the receiving Office will send an invitation asking the applicant to translate the text in the drawings to English.
❌ B. No, the text matter in the drawings does not have to be translated.
❌ C. Yes, the text matter will have to be translated into any of the languages of publication in Rule 48.3 PCT.
❌ D. The time limit to translate the text matter is two months from the date of receipt of the application at the rO.
✅ E. The time limit to translate the text matter is two months from the date of the invitation.
Answer: Yes, the text matter in the drawings will have to be translated - Art.3(4)(i), R.26.3ter(a) PCT
The receiving Office will invite the applicant to furnish a translation of the text in the drawings into English, i.e. the language of publication of this application - R.26.3ter(a)(i) PCT and R.48.3 PCT
Time limit is 2 months from the invitation - R.26.2, R.26.3ter(a) PCT
11. Which acts can lead to an accelerated prosecution before the EPO? (multiple choice)
❌ A. Early entry into the European phase.
✅ B. Entry on the last day of the 31-month period, where a PACE request is also filed when the examination division becomes responsible.
✅ C. Waiving the R.161(1)/R.161(2) EPC communication.
✅ D. Waiving the R.70(2) EPC invitation.
❌ E. Responding to the R.161(1)/R.161(2) EPC communication immediately after receipt.
Answer: See OJ EPO 2015, A94 for acceleration. Waiving the R.70(2) (only issued if the EPO didn’t act as (S)ISA) and R.161 communications (if done validly) can each save 6 months.
Early entry or a request for early processing does not lead to accelerated prosecution. - Euro-PCT guide 5.1.036
Where a communication under Rules 161(1) or (2) and 162 EPC has been issued, the applicant is entitled to the full six-month period for filing amendments, so responding early will not accelerate the proceedings. (However, if an applicant does not wish to use up the entire six-month period, the remainder of the period can be explicitly waived.) - Euro-PCT guide 5.1.037 and OJ EPO 2015, A94
12. An Argentinean, a Ukrainian and a Swedish company (named in the request in this order) file an international application at the EPO without appointing a common agent or a common representative.
Who will be considered to be the common representative of the applicants by the EPO? (single choice)
❌ A. Argentinean company
❌ B. Ukrainian company
✅ C. Swedish company
Answer: The Swedish company under R.90.2(b) PCT, because they are the applicant first named in the request who is entitled according to Rule 19.1 to file an international application with the EPO as receiving Office.
13. (EPAC 2023) After receipt of a negative written opinion issued by the EPO acting as ISA, amendments under Article 19 PCT were filed during the international phase. No request for international preliminary examination was filed. Form 1200 was used, and no further amendments were filed with the EPO upon entry into the regional phase.
What communication under Rules 161/162 EPC will be received in the regional phase? (single choice)
❌ A. Form 1226AA; if you do not reply to it in time, the application will be deemed to be withdrawn
✅ B. Form 1226BB offering the opportunity to comment and file amendments
❌ C. Form 1226CC offering the opportunity to file amendments before the supplementary European search report is drawn up
❌ D. Form 1226AC stating that the examination has started
Answer: EPO was ISA, so in principle response would be mandatory in case of a negative WO-ISA, but in this case they will consider the Art.19 amendments as a response. So, the response is not mandatory, but the applicant still has a chance to further amend and/or comment before the examination starts.
GL E-IX 3.3.1: "A reply to the communication under Rule 161(1) may not be necessary ...
... If the applicant filed amendments according to Art. 19 and/or 34 PCT in the international phase, and if the EPO prepared the WO‑ISA or SISR but no IPER (either because the applicant did not demand PCT Chapter II or because the IPEA was an office other than the EPO), then these amendments are considered to constitute a response to the WO‑ISA or SISR, provided that the applicant has indicated on entry into the European phase that these amendments are maintained.
14. An international application was filed on 25 November 2025 without claiming priority. The application only contains the first page of a two-page long independent claim, otherwise all requirements were fulfilled.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. Since at least one claim is required to get a filing date, an international filing date can only be accorded if the remaining part of the claim is filed.
❌ B. In order to avoid re-dating, any missing claims should be filed on or before 26 January 2026 (Monday).
✅ C. 25 November 2025 can be accorded as the international filing date, but if the remaining part of the claim is filed on 2 January 2026, the international filing date will change to 2 January 2026.
❌ D. Claims are not considered missing parts under the PCT, so the only remedy is to re-file the international application with the full claim.
Answer:
A. The first page of the claim is sufficient to get a filing date, see the filing date requirements in Art.11(1)(e) PCT: "a part which on the face of it appears to be a claim or claims".
B. If there is no priority claimed and the special request for incorporation by reference (R.20.6 PCT) is not used, there would always be re-dating. - R.20.5(c) PCT
C. Yes, it will be re-dated to 2 Jan when the missing claims are filed. - R.20.5(c) PCT
D. This is true in EPC, but not in PCT. Claims can be filed in PCT under R.20 PCT (depending on the situation, R.20.3, R.20.5 or R.20.5bis PCT will apply)
15. An international application was filed on 19 November 2022 without claiming priority. The international application validly enters the regional phase before the EPO at the end of the normal time limit for EP entry.
What is the last day to validly pay the renewal fee for the 3rd year with additional fee? (single choice)
❌ A. 2 June 2025
❌ B. 19 June 2025
❌ C. 20 June 2025
❌ D. 19 Dec 2025
❌ E. 20 Dec 2025
✅ F. 22 Dec 2025
Answer: R.51(1) due date would be: 30 November 2024
Euro-PCT entry time limit: 19 November 2022 + 31 m (R.159(1) EPC) → 19 June 2025 Thursday, EPO closed → 20 June 2025 Friday
So, the R.51(1) date fell due earlier than the R.159(1) date → therefore the renewal fee in respect of the third year is due on 20 June 2025
The 6-m grace period ends: 20 June 2025 + 6 m (R.51(2) and R.131(4) EPC) → 20 Dec 2025 Saturday → Monday, 22 Dec 2025
16. International application PCT-1 was filed on 10 December 2024, validly claiming priority from an application filed on 16 December 2023. The international search report was transmitted to the applicant together with the written opinion of the International Searching Authority on 14 April 2025.
What is the last day to validly file a demand for international preliminary examination? (single choice)
❌ A. 14 June 2025
❌ B. 14 July 2025
❌ C. 14 October 2025
✅ D. 16 October 2025
❌ E. 12 October 2026
Answer:
R.54bis.1(a)(i) PCT: 14 April 2025 + 3m → 14 July 2025 (Mon)
R.54bis.1(a)(ii) PCT: 16 December 2023 + 22m → 16 October 2025 (Thu)
16 October 2025 is later, so this applies.
17. Your client's international application PCT-A is pending before the EPO as ISA. PCT-A contains independent claims 1 and 2. The EPO sends an invitation dated 24 November 2025 to pay a further search fee in respect of the invention of claim 2.
What is the last day to pay the additional search fee? (single choice)
❌ A. 24 Dec 2025
✅ B. 2 Jan 2026
❌ C. 5 Jan 2026
❌ D. 24 Jan 2026
❌ E. 26 Jan 2026
Answer: If ISA invites the applicant to pay additional fees, the time limit is 1m from the date of invitation - R.40.1(ii) PCT, R.40.2 PCT, so:
24 Nov 2025 + 1m (R.80.2 PCT) → 24 Dec 2025, EPO closed, extended to (R.80.5 PCT) → 2 Jan 2026 Friday
18. An international application was filed on 2 December 2024 with the intention to enter the EP phase. When filing the application, the abstract was not filed. The rO invited the applicant to file the missing abstract, but the applicant hasn't responded to the invitation despite taking all due care. As a consequence, the rO considered the application withdrawn and issued a corresponding declaration dated 23 April 2025. The applicant learned about the failure when receiving the declaration on 29 April 2025.
Is there any way for the application to proceed to the EP phase? (single choice)
❌ A. No. Since there is no further processing or re-establishment in the PCT, the application cannot be saved, and the application cannot enter EP phase.
❌ B. Yes, there is a way to save the application as an abstract is not a necessary element of an international application, so the declaration by the rO was unjustified.
❌ C. Yes, review should be requested at the EPO the latest on 23 June 2025 (Monday), and it will likely be successful.
❌ D. Yes, review should be requested at the EPO the latest on 30 June 2025 (Monday), and it will likely be successful.
❌ E. Yes, a request for the delay to be excused, combined with re-establishment, should be filed at the EPO the latest on 23 June 2025 (Monday), and it will likely be successful.
✅ F. Yes, a request for the delay to be excused, combined with re-establishment, should be filed at the EPO the latest on 30 June 2025 (Monday), and it will likely be successful.
Answer: Abstract is not required for a filing date - A. 11(1) PCT
But it is required for an IA to have an abstract - Art.3(2) PCT
Since no abstract was filed, application is deemed withdrawn - A. 14(1)(b), R. 26.5, so the communication was correct. It is not possible to revive the IA as a whole, since there is no FP/RE in the international phase.
However, under Art. 24(2) PCT, the EPO as designated/elected Office may maintain the application as a European application - GL E-IX, 2.9.2 and EPG 5.14.004
In the national law, i.e. under the EPC for missing the abstract under R.58 EPC, RE under Art.122 is possible, but FP under Art.121 is ruled out. - R.136(3) EPC
All due care was taken, so RE can be successful - Art.122 EPC, Rule 82bis.2 PCT
Steps to take to request the excuse the delay - GL E-IX, 2.9.1 and 2.9.2:
- request the IB to send to the EPO a copy of the relevant document in the file;
- pay the filing fee for entry into EP phase;
- combine this with a request for RE, pay RE fee, and prove all due care under Art. 122 and R.136 EPC;
- complete omitted act by filing missing abstract
It is recommended to perform all required acts required for entry into the national phase under R.159(1) EPC.
Removal of cause of non-compliance (R.136(1) EPC) was on 29 April 2025, when applicant received the declaration, so the time limit is: 29 April 2025 + 2m (R.136(1), R.131(4) EPC) → 29 June 2025 Sunday –> extended to 30 June 2025
Since all due care was taken, the request will likely be accepted, and the EPO as designated Office will maintain the application as a European application.
19. An international application was filed on 1 December 2024, validly claiming priority from a national application filed on 14 December 2023. The ISR was transmitted to the applicant together with the WO-ISA on 29 April 2025 by the EPO as ISA.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. The priority claim can be withdrawn the latest on 14 June 2026.
❌ B. No demand for international preliminary examination was filed yet. If the priority is withdrawn today, on 19 December 2025, it will be possible to file a demand at the EPO as IPEA on 1 October 2026.
✅ C. If the priority is withdrawn today, on 19 December 2025, the 31-month time limit to enter the EP phase will end on 1 July 2027.
✅ D. If the applicant filed a demand on 1 September 2025, it can successfully be withdrawn by filing a request for withdrawal on 15 June 2026.
Answer:
A. Yes, priority claim can be withdrawn - R.90bis.3(a) PCT
Time limit is 30 months from the priority date - R.90bis.3(a) PCT, so it expires:
14 December 2023 + 30m (R.80.2 PCT) → 14 June 2026 (Sun) → 15 June 2026 Monday
B. No, the time limit to file a demand has already ended, so it will not be re-calculated.
Time limit to file demand - R.54bis.1(a) PCT:
R.54bis.1(a)(i): 29 April 2025 + 3m → 29 July 2025 (Tue), or
R.54bis.1(a)(ii): 14 December 2023 + 22m → 14 October 2025 (Mon)
So today it is no longer possible to file a demand, both have expired.
Under R.90bis.3(d) time limits not yet expired are to be recalculated from the new priority date (in this case the filing date). However, the time limit to file a demand already expired, so it will not be computed from filing date.
C. 14 December 2023 + 31m → 14 July 2026 (Tue)
This has not expired yet at the time of the withdrawal of the priority, so it will be recalculated from the filing date. So, it will be possible to enter on or before:
1 December 2024 + 31m → 1 July 2027.
D. It is possible to withdraw the demand.
Time limit is 30 months from the priority date - R.90bis.4(a) PCT, so it expires:
14 December 2023 + 30m (R.80.2 PCT) → 14 June 2026 (Sun) → 15 June 2026 Monday
20. Mr. Santa Claus wanted to enter the EP phase with his international application, so his elves have duly requested examination, paid the filing fee, examination fee and designation fee. However, the elves forgot to fulfil all steps. So, shortly after the 31m time limit, Mr. Claus received a loss-of-rights communication, indicating that the application was deemed to be withdrawn due to non-payment of the search fee and not filing a translation. Mr. Claus has missed the time limit to request further processing with respect to the missed periods. Santa and his elves have never made such a mistake before and are very sad about this isolated mistake in their otherwise well-functioning system.
How much money does Mr. Claus have to pay (or deduct from the elves' salary) when requesting re-establishment? (single choice)
❌ A. between 2000-2500 EUR
❌ B. between 2501-3000 EUR
❌ C. between 3001-3500 EUR
❌ D. between 3501-4000 EUR
✅ E. between 4001-4500 EUR
❌ F. between 4501-5000 EUR
Answer: Santa Claus has to pay two Re-establishment fees, two FP fees and the search fee, so the fees would be as follows:
search fee: EUR 1520
50% of search fee as FP fee: EUR 760
RE fee: EUR 750
flat FP fee (for not filing the translation): EUR 300
RE fee: EUR 750
Total: EUR 4080
Comment added on 22 December: Thank you for your feedback related to this question. If Santa also filed a declaration under R.7b(1) EPC, R.7a(3) EPC could apply to Santa as a natural person, so the fees could be:
search fee: EUR 1064 (EUR 1520 reduced by 30%)
50% of search fee as FP fee: EUR 532
RE fee: EUR 750
flat FP fee (for not filing the translation): EUR 300
RE fee: EUR 750
Total: EUR 3396
21. Frosty the Snowman validly entered EP phase with his international application last week, on the last day of the 31-month period. The international application was claiming priority from a national application. The EPO as ISA had found no relevant prior art, so Frosty is hoping for a quick grant. However, he had no idea he was supposed to file the copy of the priority document with the receiving Office in the international phase, and is now worried that the priority was lost.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. Frosty is right to worry as the priority is lost, however, further processing is available.
✅ B. In principle, the certified copy should have been submitted at latest within 16 months from the priority date, but it would have been considered to filed in time if it had been received before the publication.
✅ C. In the international phase, the certified copy could have been submitted to either the IB or the receiving Office (within the time limit regulated in the PCT).
❌ D. If not yet filed, Frosty must submit the translation of the priority document (if that is not in English/German/French) to the EPO.
Answer:
A. Frosty will still receive a Rule 163(2) EPC invitation with a 2-month time limit, so the priority is surely not yet lost one week after the entry into the EP phase. (FP will indeed be available when missing the period of the R.163(2) communication.)
B. True, see R.17.1(a) PCT
C. True, see R.17.1(a) PCT
D. Under R.53(3) EPC, the translation of the priority document will only have to be filed if the validity of the priority claim is relevant to the determination of the patentability of the invention. In that case, the EPO will send a communication under R.53(3), inviting the applicant to file a translation of that application into English/German/French within a period to be specified. Since the EPO has found no prior art in the international phase, there is no reason to assume that the translation will have to be filed for Frosty.
22. Mr. Grinch, who is resident in Whoville (not part of the EPC) has a pending international application. As Mr. Grinch prefers to work in isolation, he refrained from engaging an agent so far. After entry into the EP phase, he would like to keep working that way and communicate with the EPO directly. He is now asking your advice.
Which statement(s) is/ are true regarding representation before the EPO as designated/elected office? (multiple choice)
✅ A. The 3rd renewal fee can be paid either by Mr. Grinch or his renewal agency based in Mount Crumpit.
❌ B. Mr. Grinch must appoint a professional representative for submitting amendments, file a translation of the application and file a request for early processing within the 31-month time limit.
❌ C. If Mr. Grinch had already appointed a professional representative before the EPO as ISA, he wouldn't have to take any steps in this regard, as such representative will also be automatically appointed for the European phase.
❌ D. If Mr. Grinch fails to appoint a professional representative, he will be invited to do so within 2 months of an invitation sent by the EPO. If a representative is not appointed even then, the application will be deemed to be withdrawn.
Answer:
A. Anyone can pay fees - EPG 5.3.010 and GL A-X, 1
B. Up to expiry of the 31-month time limit under Rule 159 EPC, non-resident applicants may either comply with any requirement themselves or act through a professional representative entitled to practise before the EPO. This means that, within the 31-month time limit, non-resident applicants may themselves sign and file EPO Form 1200, submit amendments, file a translation of the application, file a request for early processing, etc. - EPG 5.3.008
C. Under no circumstances can an applicant act through an agent appointed for the international phase if the latter is not a professional representative entitled to practise before the EPO. Moreover, any such representative appointed as agent for the international phase is not automatically appointed for the European phase. A separate appointment is necessary. - EPG 5.3.011
D. First part of the answer is correct, but the consequence is refusal of the application. - R.163(5) and (6) EPC, EPG 5.3.015
The refusal may be remedied by a request for further processing. The request will be granted if within two months of notification of the refusal a professional representative is appointed and the fee for further processing is paid.
23. Grinch was relatively "happy" with your advice (as happy as he can ever be) and instructed you to proceed with the entry into the EP phase. He has received your email informing him about the official fees, and is very upset that in addition to the high fees he also has to pay claims fees and additional pages fees. He would hate nothing more than paying a fee that could be avoided. In his response, he asks for your advice again.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. Grinch can avoid paying claims fees if he reduces the number of claims to 15 at the latest upon entry into the EP phase.
✅ B. Grinch can avoid paying claims fees if he reduces the number of claims to 15 at the latest within the 6-month period of the Rule 161/162 communication.
❌ C. Grinch can avoid paying pages fees if he informs the EPO that he has reformatted the application text so that it does not exceed 35 pages..
❌ D. Grinch can avoid paying pages fees if he files amendments within the 6-month period of the Rule 161/162 communication so that the application does not exceed 35 pages.
✅ E. When calculating pages fees, amended claims under Article 19 PCT are also taken into account.
✅ F. The consequence of the non-payment of additional pages fees in the EPC is the application being deemed withdrawn, but further processing is available as a remedy.
Answer:
A. False, there is still time to amend the claims in the R.161 period. See R.162(2) EPC: If within the R.161 period amended claims are filed, the claims fees shall be computed on the basis of such amended claims and shall be paid within this period.
B. See comments for A, GL A-III, 13.2 or R.162(2) EPC.
C. As a general rule, the page fee is based on the international application as published, regardless of the language of publication. - EPG 5.7.005
GL A-III, 13.2: "If the applicant explicitly states that application documents filed on entry into the European phase have merely been reformatted (to reduce the number of pages subject to payment of an additional fee) rather than substantively amended, the EPO disregards these reformatted application documents and does not accept them as the basis for calculation of the additional fee (see the notice from the EPO dated 26 January 2009, OJ EPO 2009, 118, and its supplement, OJ EPO 2009, 338)."
B and D: Filing and page fees are unaffected by any later amendments made in the 6m period of R.161/162; only claims fees, if any, are - OJ 2009, 118 / GL A-III, 13.2
D. False. Pages with amendments filed after expiry of the 31-month time limit are not taken into account in calculating the page fee. Consequently, even if amendments submitted after expiry of the 31-month time limit reduce the number of pages already paid for, no refund will be made. - EPG 5.7.011
E. True, see EPG 5.7.005: "Amended claims under Article 19 PCT are also part of the international publication and must be taken into account."
F. True, see Art.78(2) EPC
See more about the pages fees calculation here: https://www.epo.org/en/legal/guide-europct/2023/ga_c5_7_2.html
24. Santa's elves wanted to surprise Santa by filing a demand for his pending international application. They thought Santa would not want to pay for the international preliminary examination himself, so the elves all chipped in and filed the request with the EPO as IPEA in due time. However, being super busy with the last-minute preparations at the North Pole, they forgot to check all the requirements and also made a few mistakes in the request.
Which statement(s) is/are correct? (multiple choice)
❌ A. The EPO will only act as IPEA if the EPO also acted as ISA.
❌ B. The demand should have been filed with the IB.
✅ C. If there are more applicants, all of them (or their appointed agent or the common representative) have to sign the demand. However, if only one of them signs, it will be considered sufficient and the EPO as IPEA will not send an invitation to provide the missing signature.
✅ D. If the demand is submitted to the receiving Office it will mark the date of receipt on the demand and will transmit the demand promptly to the IB or the IPEA.
❌ E. There are two fees to be paid: handling fee and preliminary examination fee. The time limit to pay both fees is 22 months of the priority date.
Answer:
A. False, the EPO will also act as IPEA if a "European ISA" carried out the international search. - EPG 4.1.017 / Annex E of EPO.
So, the full list of possible ISAs:EPO or the Austrian, Finnish, Spanish, Swedish or Turkish patent office or the Nordic Patent Institute or the Visegrad Patent Institute.
B. No, it has to be filed with the IPEA directly. - Art.31(6)(a) PCT
C. True, see R.53.8, R.60.1(a-ter) PCT and EPG 4.1.053 or EPG 4.1.066
D. True, see Rule 59.3(a) and (f) PCT
E. False, these fees can be paid within one month of the date on which the demand was submitted or within 22 months of the priority date, whichever time limit expires later. - R. 57.3, 58 PCT, EPG 4.1.057
Thank you for following the Advent calendar! Merry Christmas!