| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2013:T136612.20130604 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 04 June 2013 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 1366/12 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 02721604.3 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | C07K 7/00 C07K 7/64 A61K 38/04 A61K 38/12 A61P 35/00 A61P 29/00 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Guanylate cyclase receptor agonists for the treatment of tissue inflammation and carcinogenesis | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | Synergy Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | Hill, Christopher Michael CombiMab, Inc. |
||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.04 | ||||||||
| Headnote: | - | ||||||||
| Relevant legal provisions: |
|
||||||||
| Keywords: | Admissibility of appeal (no) - missing statement of grounds | ||||||||
| Catchwords: |
- |
||||||||
| Cited decisions: |
|
||||||||
| Citing decisions: |
|
||||||||
Summary of Facts and Submissions
I. The appeal is against the decision of the Opposition Division of the European Patent Office dated 29 March 2012 according to which the European patent No. 1 379 224 in amended form complies with the requirements of the EPC.
II. The opponent I (hereinafter "appellant") filed a notice of appeal on 8 June 2012 and paid the fee for appeal on the same day.
III. No statement setting out the grounds of appeal pursuant to Article 108 EPC was filed by the appellant. The notice of appeal contains nothing that could be regarded as a statement of grounds.
IV. By a communication dated 18 December 2012, sent by registered letter with advice of delivery, the Registry of the board informed the appellant that no statement setting out the grounds of appeal 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.
V. The appellant filed no observations in response to said communication.
Reasons for the decision
As no statement setting out the grounds of appeal has been filed, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Article 108 EPC, third sentence, in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC).
ORDER
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
