| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2007:T151806.20071120 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 20 November 2007 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1518/06 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 96939302.4 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C08F 297/08 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Propylene composition, process for preparing the same, polypropylene composition, and molded articles | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Chisso Corporation | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Basell Poliolefine Italia s.r.l. | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.03 | ||||||||
| 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 24 July 2006 concerning maintenance of the European patent No. 0863183 in amended form.
The Appellant (Opponent) filed a Notice of Appeal by letter received on 3 October 2006 and paid the fee for appeal on the same date.
No Statement of Grounds was filed.
II. By a communication dated 22 February 2007 sent by registered letter 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 given the opportunity of filing observations within two months and attention was drawn to Article 122 EPC.
III. No answer to the Registry's communication has been received.
Reasons for the Decision
As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, and the notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a Statement of Grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC, 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.
