Accordingly, OHIM was right to find that, as the legal conditions for an extension of the period specified had not been met (see paragraph 23 above), there was no need to refer the question of an extension to the other party.
Seega, kuna ühtlustamisamet leidis õigesti, et seadusest tulenevad pikendamise tingimused ei olnud täidetud (vt eespool punkti 23), ei olnud teisele poolele vaja esitada küsimust tähtaja pikendamise kohta.