| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2011:T183810.20110415 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 15 April 2011 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1838/10 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 04750740.5 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H04M 11/00 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Using a mobile station for productivy tracking | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Nokia Corporation | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | - | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.03 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Missing statement of grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal lies from the decision of the Examining Division of the European Patent Office refusing European patent application No. 04 750 740.5. The decision was dispatched by registered letter with advice of delivery to the applicant on 25 March 2010.
The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 2 June 2010 against the decision of the Examining Division. The payment of the appeal fee was recorded on the same day.
No separate statement of grounds was filed.
II. By a communication dated 6 October 2010 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 invited to file observations within two months.
III. No reply from the appellant was received within this time-limit.
Reasons for the Decision
As no written statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed within the time limit provided by Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 126(2) EPC and the notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
