| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T088300.20010420 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 20 April 2001 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0883/00 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 89902468.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C12P 21/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Method for controlling norleucine content in polypeptides | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | PHARMACIA & UPJOHN COMPANY | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Monsanto Company Eli Lilly and Company |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.04 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Missing Statement of Grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal contests the decision of the opposition division of the European Patent Office posted on 26. June 2000, by which European patent No. 0 401 254 was revoked.
The appellant filed a notice of appeal by letter received on 4 August 2000 and paid the fee for appeal on 7 August 2000. No statement of grounds of appeal was filed. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement setting out the grounds of appeal pursuant to Article 108 EPC.
II. By a communication dated 4 December 2000, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the registry of the board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds has been filed and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was invited to file observations within two months and attention was drawn to the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC.
III. No answer has been given to the Registry's communication.
Reasons for the Decision
As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 65(1) EPC).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
