| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2003:T052101.20030430 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 30 April 2003 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0521/01 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 92111815.4 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H04Q 7/38 H04B 7/26 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Method for contacting a subscriber of a mobile telephone network | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Telecom Finland Oy | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Alcatel | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.01 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Missing statement of grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal contests the interlocutory decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery to the parties on 1 March 2001 and concerning maintenance of the European patent No. 0 526 764 in amended form.
The Appellant filed a notice of appeal by letter received on 3 May 2001 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. No statement of grounds was filed. The notice of appeal contained nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC.
II. By a communication dated 4 November 2002, sent by registered post with advice of delivery, the Registrar 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's attention was drawn to the provision concerning the late receipt of documents pursuant to Rule 84a EPC and to the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC. The Appellant was invited to file observations within two months.
III. No answer was received within the given time limit to the Registry's communication. Nor is Rule 84a any longer applicable.
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:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
