T 1455/07 () of 25.4.2008

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T145507.20080425
Date of decision: 25 April 2008
Case number: T 1455/07
Application number: 98937101.8
IPC class: G09G 5/00
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.392K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Centralized control and management system for automobiles
Applicant name: American Calcar Inc.
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.4.03
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. This is an appeal against the decision to grant European patent 1 008 133 posted 1 February 2007.

The appellant applicant filed a notice of appeal on 26 March 2007. The payment of the appeal fee was recorded on the same day.

No written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the four-month time limit prescribed by Article 108 EPC.

II. By a communication dated 14 November 2007, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the board informed the representative of the appellant that it appeared that no written statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that it was therefore to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months and attention was drawn to the possibility of filing a request for reestablishment of rights under Article 122 EPC. No response was received to the board's communication.

Reasons for the Decision

1. As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed and as the notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds of appeal pursuant to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation