T 1099/05 (Ligands/REGENERON) of 18.5.2006

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T109905.20060518
Date of decision: 18 May 2006
Case number: T 1099/05
Application number: 95916204.1
IPC class: C12N 15/12
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.591K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Biologically active EPH family ligands
Applicant name: REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
Opponent name: Amgen Inc.
Board: 3.3.08
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. Patentee (appellant) filed on 17 August 2005 a notice of appeal against the decision of the opposition division dated 8 June 2005 whereby the European patent No. 0 758 381 with the title "Biologically active EPH family ligands" was maintained in amended form under Article 102(3) EPC. The appeal fee was paid on the same day. No statement of grounds of appeal was filed.

II. By a communication dated 19 December 2005 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the registry of the board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds had been filed and that, therefore, the appeal had to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months and attention was drawn to the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC. The appellant did not reply to said communication. Nor was a request for re-establishment of rights filed.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed and as the notice of appeal does not contain anything that could be regarded as a statement of grounds of appeal according to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 65(1) EPC).

ORDER

For these reasons, it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation