Application Order

1. R. 9.3 (a) of the Rules of Procedure authorises the Court to extend time periods. However, this possibility should only be used with caution and only in justified exceptional cases. 2. Such an exceptional case regularly exists if access to a pleading in the unredacted version was initially restricted to the representatives due to an application for protection of confidential information (R. 262A RoP). The only way to ensure that the party concerned can exchange information with its representatives, develop a strategy taking into account the arguments of the other party and, where necessary, provide technical and/or economic input, is to grant access to the information in question to the party's employees with the relevant knowledge. 3. The Rules of Procedure provide for a time period of two months for the filing of the Reply to the Statement of defence which includes a Counterclaim for revocation (R. 29 (a) RoP). This time period must be available to the claimant and its representatives in order to jointly develop a defence strategy based on all the facts and to file pleadings on the basis of that strategy. Therefore, an extension of the time period is, in principle, granted upon request. 4. The same applies to the Counterclaim for revocation. The principles of due process and the right to be heard require that a party must be able to reconcile its arguments on (non)-infringement with those on validity and possible amendment of the claims, in particular in its first submission on validity.

R. 262A-Application, Extension of a time period