T 1584/09 (Wireless communication/QUALCOMM) of 26.2.2010

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T158409.20100226
Date of decision: 26 February 2010
Case number: T 1584/09
Application number: 04713806.0
IPC class: H04B 7/02
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 15.286K)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Equalization of multiple signals received for soft handoff in wireless communication systems
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.5.03
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108 Sent 3
European Patent Convention R 101(1)
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 refusing European patent application No. 04713806.0. The decision was dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery to the applicant dated 17 February 2009.

The appellant filed a notice of appeal by a letter received on 25 March 2009. The payment of the appeal fee was recorded on the same day. The notice of appeal included a conditional request for oral proceedings.

II. By a communication dated 3 August 2009 sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the registry of the board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months.

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

Reasons for the Decision

1. As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, and as the notice of appeal contains nothing 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 101(1) EPC).

2. As the appellant has not replied to the communication referred to under II. above or filed a statement of grounds, it is evident that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. The conditional request for oral proceedings therefore no longer has any basis.


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation