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 1876/13 () of 7.5.2014

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2014:T187613.20140507
Date of decision: 07 May 2014
Case number: T 1876/13
Application number: 99203477.7
IPC class: G01V 1/28
G01V 1/30
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 209.955K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method of estimating elastic parameters and rock composition of underground formations using seismic data
Applicant name: Jason Geosystems B.V.
Opponent name: ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company
Board: 3.4.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention R 99(2)
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
European Patent Convention Art 108
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. This is an appeal against the revocation of European paten No. 1094338 posted on 3 July 2013.

II. The appellant proprietor filed a notice of appeal on 3 September 2013 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. No separate statement of grounds of appeal was filed.

III. By communication of 6 December 2013 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the appellant proprietor was informed that no written statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that it was therefore 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. A copy of the communication was sent to the respondent opponent on the same day for information.

IV. No answer has been given to the communication within the time limit. No request for re-establishment of rights was filed.

Reasons for the Decision

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 pursuant to Article 108, third sentence, and Rule 99(2) EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation