T 1163/07 () of 15.2.2008

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T116307.20080215
Date of decision: 15 February 2008
Case number: T 1163/07
Application number: 01988578.9
IPC class: A61K 7/075
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.567K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Mono and dialkyl quats in hair conditioning compositions
Applicant name: UNILEVER PLC, et al
Opponent name: Henkel Kommanditgesellschaft auf Aktien
Board: 3.3.07
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. In its written decision issued 27 June 2007 the Opposition Division rejected the Opposition against the European patent No. 1328243.

With facsimile dated 12 July 2007 the Appellant (Opponent) filed a Notice of Appeal against this decision and paid the appeal fee on the same date. The Appellant requested that the decision of the Opposition Division be set aside and the European Patent revoked.

No statement of Grounds had arrived during the 4 month filing period envisaged by Article 108 EPC.

II. By a communication dated 12 December 2007 and sent by registered letter, the Registry of the Board informed the Appellant that no Statement of Grounds had been filed and that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible. The Appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

III. With facsimile letter dated 19 December 2007, received on 20 December 2007 the Appellant informed the Board that no Statement of Grounds had been filed.

With facsimile letter dated 6 February 2008 received on 7 February 2008 the Appellant informed the Board that its request for oral proceedings was withdrawn and that the proceedings could be closed.

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 101(1) (formerly 65(1)) EPC).

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation