T 1031/10 () of 24.11.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T103110.20101124
Date of decision: 24 November 2010
Case number: T 1031/10
Application number: 03790067.7
IPC class: A61B 5/055
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.604K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Magnetic resonance imaging system and methods for the detection of brain iron deposits
Applicant name: GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.2.02
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appellants (applicants) appealed against the decision of the Examining Division posted 25 November 2009 to refuse the European patent application No. 03 790 067.7.

II. The notice of appeal was received on 28 January 2010 and the appeal fee was paid on the same day. However, no statement of grounds of appeal has been filed within the time limit for doing so, nor did the notice of appeal contain anything that might be considered as such statement.

III. In a communication dated 4 June 2010 sent by registered post with advice of delivery, the Board informed the representative of the appellants that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that, as a consequence, it was to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible. The appellants were also given a time limit of two months for filing observations starting from the date of notification of said communication.

IV. The communication was notified on 10 June 2010. No observations were filed within the given time limit.

Reasons for the Decision

1. According to Article 108 EPC, a statement setting out the grounds of appeal shall be filed within four months of notification of the decision.

2. If the appeal does not comply with Article 108 EPC, the appeal must be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 101(1) EPC). In the present case, no statement of grounds has been filed and consequently the appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation