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 1361/15 () of 12.2.2016

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2016:T136115.20160212
Date of decision: 12 February 2016
Case number: T 1361/15
Application number: 00992510.8
IPC class: C23F 1/18
H05K 3/38
C23C 22/68
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 214.928K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Applicant name: OMG Electronic Chemicals, Inc
Opponent name: Jenkins, Peter David
Board: 3.2.07
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108 Sent 3
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal contests the interlocutory decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office posted on 4 May 2015 concerning maintenance of European Patent No. 1 255 797 in amended form.

The appellant (opponent) filed a notice of appeal on 7 July 2015 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.

No statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed.

II. By a communication dated 24 September 2015 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the registry of the Board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed so that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

III. No answer has been given to the registry's communication.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The notice of appeal filed on 7 July 2015 contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement setting out the grounds of appeal pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

2. As no such written statement has been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC, third sentence, in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation