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 1668/06 (Lubricating oil additives/LUBRIZOL ADIBIS) of 29.5.2007

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T166806.20070529
Date of decision: 29 May 2007
Case number: T 1668/06
Application number: 95303008.7
IPC class: C10M 159/12
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.262K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Lubricating oil additives
Opponent name: Chevron Oronite Company LLC
Board: 3.3.01
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 Opposition Division of the European Patent Office dated 25 August 2006 revoking the European patent No. 0682101. The decision was dispatched by registered 1etters with advice of delivery on 25 August 2006. The proprietor of the patent filed a notice of appeal by letter dated 23 October 2006, received on 23 October 2006, and paid the fee for appeal on 24 October 2006. 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 13 February 2007 sent by registered post, 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 informed about the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC, and was invited to file observations within two months.

III. No answer has been given within the given time limit to the Registry's communication.

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 (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 65(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation