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 1504/06 (Thrombolytically active proteins/ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS GMBH) of 15.3.2007

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T150406.20070315
Date of decision: 15 March 2007
Case number: T 1504/06
Application number: 98102473.0
IPC class: A61K 38/58
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 14.878K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Combination of thrombolytically active proteins and anticoagulants and uses thereof
Applicant name: Roche Diagnostics GmbH
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.04
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

The appeal contests the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office dated 6 April 2006 concerning refusal the European Patent application No. 98 102 473.0.

The appellant (applicant) filed a notice of appeal on 7 June 2006 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.

No statement of grounds was filed by the appellant.

The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

By communications dated 1 December 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.

Attention was also drawn to Article 122 EPC.

In response to an inquiry by the registry of the Board, the representative of the appellant confirmed that no response was filed to the communication of 1 December 2006.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 65(1) EPC in conjunction with Article 108 EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation