T 1569/08 (Lymphotropic retrovirus diagnosis/NOVARTIS) of 30.3.2009

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2009:T156908.20090330
Date of decision: 30 March 2009
Case number: T 1569/08
Application number: 02077411.3
IPC class: C12N 15/48
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.413K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Recombinant proteins of viruses associated with lymphadenopathy syndrome and/or acquired immune deficiency syndrome
Applicant name: Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc.
Opponent name: Institut Pasteur
Board: 3.3.08
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101
Keywords: Missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appellant (opponent) contests the interlocutory decision of the opposition division of the European Patent Office dated 3 June 2008 whereby the European patent No. 1 245 678 was maintained in amended form.

The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 1 August 2008 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.

A written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was not filed within the four-month time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC. Nor did the notice of appeal contain anything that might be considered as such statement.

II. In a communication dated 17 November 2008, the Board informed the appellant that no statement setting out the grounds of appeal had been received and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was informed that any observations should be filed within two months.

III. The appellant filed no observations in response to said communication.

Reasons for the Decision

As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC, the appeal is inadmissible pursuant to Rule 101(1)EPC.


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation