| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2001:T069601.20011217 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 17 December 2001 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0696/01 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 93921576.0 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | A61K 7/027 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Moisturizing lipstick compositions | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | (01) Unilever PLC et al (02) L'OREAL |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.07 | ||||||||
| 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 19 April 2001 revoking European patent No. 0 660 697 pursuant to Article 102(1) EPC.
The appellant (proprietor of the patent) filed a notice of appeal on 21 June 2001 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.
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.
II. By a communication dated 13 September 2001, 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 informed about the possibility of filing a request for re-establishment of rights under Article 122 EPC and was invited to file observations within two months.
III. No answer has been given within the given time limit to the registry's communication.
IV. By letter dated 28 September 2001 the appellant confirmed that the auxiliary request for oral proceedings was not intended to apply to the question of inadmissibility of the appeal as a consequence of the fact that a written statement of grounds of appeal had not been filed and that the request for oral proceedings was withdrawn.
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.
