| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2012:T133412.20120912 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 12 September 2012 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1334/12 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 05754868.7 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | H04L 12/14 | ||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | METHOD FOR SELECTING A CHARGING RULE IN CONNECTION WITH SUBSCRIBER | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson (publ) | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.5.05 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal is against the interlocutory decision of the opposition division, posted 19 January 2012, concerning the maintenance of the European patent No. 1622304 in amended form.
II. Notice of appeal was received on 5 March 2012 and the appeal fee was paid on the same day. The notice of appeal contains an auxiliary request for oral proceedings.
III. 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 statement.
IV. With a communication dated 19 June 2012, 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 further informed that any observations should be filed within two months.
V. The appellant filed no observations in response to said communication.
VI. With a letter dated 10 September 2012, the appellant withdrew the request for oral proceedings.
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.
