14-15 November 2018
|European Case Law Identifier:||ECLI:EP:BA:2009:T019909.20090605|
|Date of decision:||05 June 2009|
|Case number:||T 0199/09|
|IPC class:||G01N 33/53|
|Language of proceedings:||EN|
|Download and more information:||
|Title of application:||Method and apparatus for detecting an organism-originated substance|
|Applicant name:||FUJIFILM Corporation|
|Relevant legal provisions:||
|Keywords:||Missing statement of grounds
Reimbursement of appeal fee - no
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. On 16 October 2008, the appellant (applicant) filed a notice of appeal against the decision of the examining division dated 12 August 2008, whereby the European patent application No. 00 106 729.7 was refused pursuant to Article 97(2) EPC. 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 28 January 2009 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, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months.
III. In a letter dated 10 February 2009, the appellant requested refund of the appeal fee.
Reasons for the Decision
1. 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).
2. Rule 103(1) EPC defines the circumstances under which the appeal fee shall be reimbursed as:
(a) in the event of interlocutory revision or where the Board of Appeal deems an appeal to be allowable, if such reimbursement is equitable by reason of a substantial procedural violation or,
(b) if the appeal is withdrawn before the filing of the statement of grounds of appeal and before the period for filing that statement of grounds.
3). Failure to file a statement of grounds of appeal is not a circumstance which justifies reimbursement of the appeal. For this reason, the request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is rejected.
For these reasons, it is decided that:
1. The appeal is rejected as inadmissible;
2. The request for reimbursement of the appeal fee is rejected.