Boards of Appeal symbol


Boards of Appeal

Contact us using an online form

Richard-Reitzner-Allee 8
85540 Haar

All contact information

Boards of Appeal and key decisions conference

14-15 November 2018
EPO Munich

Register now


T 2127/08 (Heterozygous waxy sugar-2 maize/BRUNOB II B.V.) of 6.5.2009

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2009:T212708.20090506
Date of decision: 06 May 2009
Case number: T 2127/08
Application number: 03004879.7
IPC class: A01H 5/10
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.329K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method of grain production for heterozygous waxy sugary-2 maize
Applicant name: BRUNOB II B.V.
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.04
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal contests the decision of the examining division of the European Patent Office dated 9 May 2008 concerning refusal of the European patent application No. 03004879.7.

II. The appellant (applicant) filed a notice of appeal on 15 July 2008 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.

III. No statement of grounds was filed by the appellant. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

IV. By communication dated 13 November 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. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months; further, the appellant was requested to make clear if the auxiliary request for oral proceedings was not intended to apply to the question of inadmissibility of the appeal as a consequence of the fact that a written statement of grounds of appeal has not been filed.

V. The appellant, by letter dated 18 November 2008, withdrew the request for oral proceedings.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal had been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 101(1) EPC in conjunction with Article 108 EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation