1. Hepatitis A Virus/United States of America II Decision G 2/93 [19...] OJ EPO ...which resolved differences between earlier decisions on this subject such as Decision J8/87 [1989] OJ EPO 9 and Rockefeller University [1990] OJ EPO 156. According to the Hepatitis A decision, the supply of this information is not a mere formal requirement but gives rise to substantive rights since under Rule 28(2) it is the supply of this information that creates a third party's rights of access (or if access is restricted to an expert , the expert's right) to obtain samples of the microorganism after publication of the patent application.

2. Amylolytic Enzymes/CPC INT Decision T 118/87 [1991] OJ EPO 474.

3. Under Rule 28 as it existed up to October 1, 1996, if an application was withdrawn or refused, samples had to be available to all members of the public from the date of withdrawal or abandonment.

4. New Rule 28(6)(a). For the text of the revised rules see [1996] OJ EPO 390.

5. T418/89 [1993] OJ EPO 20.