T 1311/04 (Antenna with molded integral polarity plate/CHANNEL MASTER) of 25.4.2005

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2005:T131104.20050425
Date of decision: 25 April 2005
Case number: T 1311/04
Application number: 00928714.5
IPC class: H01Q 3/02
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 51.593K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Antenna with molded integral polarity plate
Applicant name: Channel Master LLC
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.5.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention 1973 Art 108
European Patent Convention 1973 R 65(1)
European Patent Convention 1973 R 84a
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal lies from the decision of the examining division of the European Patent Office dated 10 May 2004 refusing the European patent application 00928714.5. The decision was dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery to the applicant on the day it was given.

II. The appellant (applicant) filed a notice of appeal by a letter received on 20 July 2004. The payment of the appeal fee was recorded 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.

III. By a communication dated 23 November 2004, sent by registered post 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.

Receipt of this communication was acknowledged by facsimile of 11 March 2005.

The appellant's attention was drawn to the provision concerning the late receipt of documents pursuant to Rule 84a EPC and to the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

IV. With facsimile of 14 April 2005 the appellant confirmed that he had not filed and did not intend to file a request for re-establishment of rights.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed within the time limit provided by Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 78(2) EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 65(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation