T 1113/18 () of 26.10.2018

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2018:T111318.20181026
Date of decision: 26 October 2018
Case number: T 1113/18
Application number: 11824164.5
IPC class: C07K 16/28
A61K 39/395
A61K 9/127
C12N 15/13
A61P 29/00
A61P 35/00
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 224 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Applicant name: Purdue Research Foundation
The United States of America, as represented by
The Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.3.04
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 101(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 Examining Division of 19 October 2017, posted on 6 November 2017, to refuse European patent application No. 11 824 164.5 .

II. The appellants filed a notice of appeal on

11 January 2018 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.

III. By communication of 8 May 2018, received by the appellant, 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