T 1146/05 () of 10.4.2006

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2006:T114605.20060410
Date of decision: 10 April 2006
Case number: T 1146/05
Application number: 96926142.9
IPC class: H04N 7/18
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 51.606K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Image splitting, forming and processing device and method for use with no moving parts camera
Applicant name: Sensormatic Electronics Corporation
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.5.01
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds
Withdrawal of request for oral proceedings
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appellant contest the decision of the examining division of the European Patent Office dated 31 March 2005 refusing European patent application No. 96 926 142.9.

The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 31 May 2005 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.

The notice of appeal contains an auxiliary request for oral proceedings.

A written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was not filed within the four-month time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC. Nor did the notice of appeal contain anything that might be considered as such statement.

II. In a communication dated 26 October 2005, the Board informed the appellant that no statement setting out the grounds of appeal had been received and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was informed that any observations should be filed within two months.

III. In a letter dated 4 April 2006 the appellant withdrew the request for oral proceedings.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC, the appeal is inadmissible pursuant to Rule 65(1) EPC.

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation