Boards of Appeal symbol


Boards of Appeal

Contact us using an online form

Richard-Reitzner-Allee 8
85540 Haar

All contact information

Boards of Appeal and key decisions conference

14-15 November 2018
EPO Munich

Register now


T 0967/06 () of 17.1.2007

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T096706.20070117
Date of decision: 17 January 2007
Case number: T 0967/06
Application number: 01302446.8
IPC class: B31F 1/14
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.064K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Creping blade, creped paper and method of manufacturing paper
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.2.05
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal contests the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office posted 18 November 2005 refusing the European patent

application No. 01 302 446.8.

The Appellant filed a notice of appeal by letter received on 18 January 2006 and paid the fee for appeal on the same date. No Statement of Grounds was filed. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a Statement of Grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

II. By a communication dated 26 July 2006 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 the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months and attention was drawn to Article 122 EPC and Rule 84a EPC.

III. No answer to the Registry's communication has been received.

Reasons for the Decision

No written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, and the notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a Statement of Grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC. Consequently the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Rule 65(1) EPC in conjunction with Article 108 EPC, third sentence.


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation