|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2008:T059008.20081212|
|Date of decision:||12 December 2008|
|Case number:||T 0590/08|
|IPC class:||C12N 15/12|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Bone morphogenetic protein-16 (BMP-16) compositions|
|Applicant name:||Genetics Institute, LLC|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Missing statement of grounds|
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The applicant (appellant) filed on 19 December 2007 a notice of appeal against the decision of the examining division dated 11 October 2007, whereby the European patent application No. 97 933 347.3 (published as WO 98/12322 on 26 March 1998) entitled "Bone morphogenetic protein-16 (BMP-16) compositions" was refused pursuant to Article 97(1) EPC on the grounds of lack of inventive step (Art. 56 EPC) and lack of industrial application (Art. 57 EPC in conjunction with Rule 23(e)(3) EPC 1973). The appeal fee was paid on the same day. No statement of grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit set by Article 108 EPC.
II. By a communication dated 26 May 2008 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the appellant was informed that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that, therefore, it was to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Article 108, 3rd sentence EPC in conjunction witch Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months. The appellant did not reply to said communication, and no request for re-establishment of rights was filed.
Reasons for the Decision
As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed and as the notice of appeal does not contain anything that could be regarded as a statement of grounds of appeal according to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC). Since the appeal is inadmissible, none of the requests in the notice of appeal, including the request for oral proceedings, can be considered.
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.