T 0396/04 () of 29.7.2004

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2004:T039604.20040729
Date of decision: 29 July 2004
Case number: T 0396/04
Application number: 96306229.4
IPC class: B01J 31/08
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Method for preparing ion-exchange resin for use as a catalyst in the synthesis of bisphenols
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.07
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

I. The appeal contests the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office posted on 2 October 2003 refusing European patent application No. 96 306 229.4 pursuant to Article 97(1) EPC.

The applicant (appellant) filed a notice of appeal on 4. December 2003 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.

No statement of grounds was filed. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.

II. By a communication dated 6 May 2004, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the Registry of the Board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds had been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible.

The appellant was informed about the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC and was invited to file observations within two months.

III. No answer was received within the given time limit to the Registry's communication.

IV. By letter dated 23 July 2004, the request for oral proceedings was withdrawn.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, 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