T 0088/02 () of 19.9.2002

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2002:T008802.20020919
Date of decision: 19 September 2002
Case number: T 0088/02
Application number: 95900225.4
IPC class: C11D 17/06
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 14 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Process for the production of a detergent composition
Applicant name: UNILEVER PLC, et al
Opponent name: Henkel KGaA
Board: 3.3.06
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
Keywords: Missing Statement of Grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

The appeal contests the decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office dated 22 November 2001, rejecting the opposition pursuant to Article 102(2) EPC.

The Appellant (Opponent) filed a Notice of Appeal on 22 January 2002 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.

No Statement of Grounds was filed.

By a communication dated 10 May 2002 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the Registry Board informed the Appellant that no Statement of Grounds has been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The Appellant was invited to file observations within two months and attention was drawn to the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights unter Article 122 EPC.

No answer has been given within the given time limit to the Registry's communication.

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 according to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 65(1) EPC).


For these reasons, it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation