T 2260/13 (Chimeric antigen hepatitis C virus Fc fragment/AKSHAYA) of 21.2.2014

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2014:T226013.20140221
Date of decision: 21 February 2014
Case number: T 2260/13
Application number: 06790840.0
IPC class: C12N 15/62
A61K 47/48
A61K 39/29
A61P 31/14
C07K 14/18
C07K 16/18
C07K 19/00
C12N 1/21
C12N 15/13
C12N 15/51
C12N 15/63
C12N 5/10
C12P 21/02
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 208.474K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: CHIMERIC ANTIGEN CONTAINING HEPATITIS C VIRUS POLYPEPTIDE AND FC FRAGMENT FOR ELICITING AN IMMUNE RESPONSE
Applicant name: AKSHAYA BIO INC.
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.08
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal lies against the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office of 29 May 2013 whereby European patent application No. 06 790 840.0, published as EP-A1-1 948 802 with the title "Chimeric antigen containing hepatitis C virus polypeptide and Fc fragment for eliciting an immune response", was refused.

II. The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 16 July 2013 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. No statement of grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit set by Article 108 EPC.

III. By communication of 28 November 2013 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the EPO informed the appellant that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that, therefore, it was to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Article 108, third sentence, and Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months. The appellant did not reply to said communication, and no request for reestablishment 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 any statements that could be regarded as a statement of grounds of appeal pursuant to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).

Order

For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation