| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T043401.20011010 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 10 October 2001 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0434/01 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 95200999.1 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C08F 4/643 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | C | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Aluminum-free monocyclopentadienyl metallocene catalysts for olefin polymerization | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | ExxonMobil Chemical Patents Inc. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Missing Statement of Grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. In its decision dated 8 February 2001 the Opposition Division maintained the European patent No. 0 672 688 in amended form.
II. The Appellant (Opponent) appealed against the decision of the Opposition Division on 17 April 2001 requesting that the patent be revoked. The appeal fee was paid on 17. April 2001. No Statement of Grounds was filed.
The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a Statement of Grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.
III. By a communication dated 6 July 2001 sent by registered post with advice of delivery, the Registry of the Board informed the Appellant that no Statement of Grounds 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.
IV. The Appellant filed no observations in response to said communication within the given time limit.
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.
