T 2068/12 () of 22.11.2013

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2013:T206812.20131122
Date of decision: 22 November 2013
Case number: T 2068/12
Application number: 94931851.3
IPC class: A61N 1/05
A61B 5/042
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 206 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Applicant name: Boston Scientific Limited
Opponent name: C. R. Bard, Inc.
Board: 3.4.01
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 100(1)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal is directed against the decision of the Opposition Division of 17 July 2012, rejecting the opposition filed against European patent N° 0 754 075 pursuant to Article 101(2) EPC.

II. The appellant (opponent) filed a notice of appeal on 17 September 2012 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.

III. By communication of 8 April 2013, received by the appellant on 9 April 2013, the Registry of the Board informed the appellant that it appeared from the file that the written statement of grounds of appeal had not been filed and that it was therefore to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Article 108, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was informed that any observations had to be filed within two months of notification of the communication.

IV. No reply was received.

Reasons for the Decision

No written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit provided by Article 108, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 126(2) EPC. In addition, neither the notice of appeal nor any other document filed contains anything that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC and Rule 99(2) EPC. Therefore, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 101(1) EPC).


For these reasons it is decided that:

The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.

Quick Navigation