T 1504/07 () of 19.3.2008

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T150407.20080319
Date of decision: 19 March 2008
Case number: T 1504/07
Application number: 97904765.1
IPC class: A61K 31/52
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 16.769K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Modulation of TH1/TH2 cytokine expression by ribavirin in activated t-lymphocytes
Applicant name: Ribapharm, Inc.
Opponent name: Krauss, Jan B.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Sandoz GmbH
Board: 3.3.02
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal contests the decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery to the Patent proprietor on 3 July 2007, and concerning the revocation of the European patent No. 0879056.

The Appellant (Patent proprietor) filed a Notice of Appeal by a letter received on 3 September 2007 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day. 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 28 December 2007, sent by registered post, the Registrar of the Board informed the Appellant that no Statement of Grounds has been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible.

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 101(1) EPC (formerly Rule 65(1) EPC 1973)).

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation