European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2010:T056410.20101013 | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Date of decision: | 13 October 2010 | ||||||||
Case number: | T 0564/10 | ||||||||
Application number: | 00907041.8 | ||||||||
IPC class: | G06F 9/445 G06F 17/30 |
||||||||
Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
Distribution: | D | ||||||||
Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
Title of application: | Pre-defined hardware and software bundle ready for database applications | ||||||||
Applicant name: | ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION | ||||||||
Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
Board: | 3.5.01 | ||||||||
Headnote: | - | ||||||||
Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
Keywords: | Missing statement of grounds of appeal | ||||||||
Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
Citing decisions: |
|
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appellant contests the decision of the examining division of the European Patent Office dated 1 October 2010 refusing European patent application No. 00907041.8.
The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 11 December 2010 and paid the appeal fee on the same day.
The notice of appeal contains an auxiliary request for oral proceedings.
A written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was not filed within the four-month time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC. Nor did the notice of appeal contain anything that might be considered as such a statement.
II. In a communication dated 23 March 2010, the Board informed the appellant that no statement setting out the grounds of appeal had been received and that the appeal could be expected to be rejected as inadmissible. The appellant was informed that any observations should be filed within two months.
III. The appellant filed no observations in response to said communication.
In a letter dated 30 March 2010 the appellant declared that the auxiliary request for oral proceedings was not intended to apply to the question of inadmissibility of the appeal.
Reasons for the Decision
As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit provided for in Article 108 EPC, the appeal is inadmissible pursuant to Rule 101(1) EPC.
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.