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 1116/09 (Inadmissibility of the appeal) of 14.1.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T111609.20100114
Date of decision: 14 January 2010
Case number: T 1116/09
Application number: 03705483.0
IPC class: B65H 51/18
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.478K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Floating lifting device
Applicant name: IHC Gusto Engineering B.V.
Opponent name: Technip France
Board: 3.2.05
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101
Keywords: -


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. This matter concerns an appeal against the interlocutory decision of the Opposition Division posted on 23 March 2009, concerning the maintenance of European patent No. 1 467 944 in amended form.

II. The appellant (opponent 01) filed a notice of appeal on 25 May 2009 and paid the fee for appeal on the same date. 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, third sentence, and Rule 101(1) EPC.

III. By a communication dated 17 September 2009, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery and received on 22 September 2009, 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.

IV. No response was made 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, third sentence, in conjunction with Rule 101(1)EPC.


For these reasons it is decided that

The Appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation