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 1566/11 () of 21.3.2012

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T156611.20120321
Date of decision: 21 March 2012
Case number: T 1566/11
Application number: 98301769.0
IPC class: F41H 5/04
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.928K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Composite armor panel
Applicant name: MOFET ETZION
Opponent name: Plasan-Sasa - Limited Partnership of Kibbutz Sasa
Rafael-Armament Development Authority Ltd.
Board: 3.2.03
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 appellant (opponent 01) appealed against the decision of the Opposition Division dated 15 April 2011 rejecting the opposition filed against European Patent No. 0 942 255.

II. The notice of appeal was received on 24 June 2011 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 10 October 2011 sent by registered post with advice of delivery, the Board informed the appellant 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 appellant was also given a time limit of two months for filing observations starting from the date of notification of said communication.

IV. The communication was received on 13 October 2011. 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.


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation