14-15 November 2018
|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T196107.20080701|
|Date of decision:||01 July 2008|
|Case number:||T 1961/07|
|IPC class:||A61K 38/17|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Use of betaglycan to reduce scarring|
|Applicant name:||Renovo Limited|
|Opponent name:||GENZYME CORPORATION|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Admissible appeal - (no)|
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal contests the interlocutory decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office posted on 24 September 2007 concerning maintenance of European patent No. 841937 in amended form.
The Appellant (Opponent) filed a notice of appeal on 4 December 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. In a communication dated 19 March 2008 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.
III. By letter dated 21 May 2008 the Appellant confirmed, that the request for oral proceedings was not intended to apply to the question of inadmissibility of the appeal.
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)
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.