T 1848/10 (Microvesicles/Proxy Life) of 28.2.2011

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T184810.20110228
Date of decision: 28 February 2011
Case number: T 1848/10
Application number: 05733066.4
IPC class: A61K 48/00
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.403K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: RNA-containing microvesicles and methods therefor
Applicant name: Proxy Life Science Holdings, Inc.
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
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal is against the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office dated 24 March 2010 concerning refusal of the European Patent application No. 05 733 066.4.

II. The appellant (applicant) filed a notice of appeal on 20 May 2010 and paid the appeal fee 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 September 2010, 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 had not been filed.

V. The appellant, by letter dated 24 September 2010, confirmed that oral proceedings were not required regarding the question of inadmissibility of the appeal.

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 (Rule 101(1) EPC in conjunction with Article 108 EPC).

ORDER

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation