T 1849/06 (Insecticidal DNA/SYNGENTA) of 4.10.2007

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T184906.20071004
Date of decision: 04 October 2007
Case number: T 1849/06
Application number: 92922321.2
IPC class: C12N 15/32
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 17 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Synthetic DNA sequence having enhanced insecticidal activity in maize
Applicant name: Syngenta Participations AG
Opponent name: Dow Agrosciences LLC
Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc.
Bayer BioScience N.V.
Monsanto Company
Board: 3.3.08
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 proprietor (appellant) filed on 7 December 2006 a notice of appeal against the decision of the opposition division dated 29 September 2006, whereby the European patent No. 0 618 976 was revoked. The appeal fee was paid on the same day. No statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed.

II. By a communication dated 16 March 2007 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the Registrar of the Board of Appeal informed the appellant that no written statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that therefore the appeal was 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 under Article 122 EPC. The appellant did not reply to said communication, and no request for re-establishment 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 65(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation