| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2009:T035409.20091027 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 27 October 2009 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 0354/09 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 01966137.0 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | A61B 17/22 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Systems for applying ultrasonic energy to the thoracic cavity and other targeted body regions | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Timi 3 Systems, Inc. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.2.02 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Missing statement of grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appellant appealed against the decision of the Examining Division dated 21 November 2008 to refuse the European patent application No. 01966137 in amended form.
II. The notice of appeal was received on 20 January 2009 and the appeal fee was paid on the same day. However, no statement of grounds of appeal has been filed within the time limit for doing so, nor did the notice of appeal contain anything that might be considered as such statement.
III. In a communication dated 15 May 2009 sent by registered post with advice of delivery, the Board informed the appellant that no statement of grounds of appeal had been filed and that, as a consequence, it was to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was also given a time limit of two months for filing observations starting from the date of notification of said communication.
IV. The communication was notified on 22 May 2009. No observations were filed within the given time limit.
Reasons for the Decision
1. According to Article 108 EPC, a statement setting out the grounds of appeal shall be filed within four months of notification of the decision.
2. If the appeal does not comply with Article 108 EPC, the appeal must be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 101(1) EPC). In the present case, no statement of grounds has been filed and consequently the appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
