T 2247/18 (Missing statement of grounds / ARKEMA FRANCE) of 30.4.2019

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2019:T224718.20190430
Date of decision: 30 April 2019
Case number: T 2247/18
Application number: 07119432.8
IPC class: C07C 17/25
C07C 21/18
C07C 17/20
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 227 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Processes for selective dehydrohalogenation of halogenated alkanes
Applicant name: Honeywell International Inc.
Opponent name: ARKEMA FRANCE
Board: 3.3.10
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108
European Patent Convention R 99(2)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds


Cited decisions:
G 0002/91
Citing decisions:

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. Both parties appealed the decision of the Opposition Division announced on 17 May 2018, posted on 10 July 2018, to maintain the patent in amended form under Articles 101(3)(a) and 106(2) EPC.

II. The appellant (patent proprietor) Honeywell International Inc. filed a notice of appeal on 19 September 2018 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. He filed a statement of grounds of appeal on 19 November 2018. He withdrew his appeal on 28 March 2019.

III. The appellant (opponent) ARKEMA FRANCE filed a notice of appeal on 7 September 2018 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.

By communication of 7 December 2018, receipt of which was confirmed by said 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 his 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 the communication.

No reply was received.

Reasons for the Decision

1. The appellant Honeywell International Inc. has withdrawn his appeal and is thus party as of right, Article 107 EPC. Following G 02/91 the proceedings cannot continue in case there is no appeal pending.

2. The remaining appeal of appellant ARKEMA FRANCE is inadmissible.

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