| European Case Law Identifier: | ECLI:EP:BA:2019:T233514.20190312 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date of decision: | 12 March 2019 | ||||||||
| Case number: | T 2335/14 | ||||||||
| Application number: | 06743894.5 | ||||||||
| IPC class: | A61K 31/08 A61K 9/12 A61P 9/10 A61P 25/28 |
||||||||
| Language of proceedings: | EN | ||||||||
| Distribution: | D | ||||||||
| Download and more information: |
|
||||||||
| Title of application: | Therapeutic sclerosing foam made preferably from xenon | ||||||||
| Applicant name: | BTG International Limited | ||||||||
| Opponent name: | CHEMISCHE FABRIK KREUSSLER & CO. GMBH | ||||||||
| Board: | 3.3.01 | ||||||||
| 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 directed against the decision of the opposition division rejecting the opposition, posted on 13 October 2014.
II. The opponent (appellant) filed a notice of appeal on 18 December 2014 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. It requested that the decision of the opposition division be set aside and the patent be revoked. As an auxiliary measure, oral proceedings were requested.
III. By its communication of 19 December 2018, the board informed the appellant that it appeared from the file that the written statement of grounds of appeal had not been filed, and that it was therefore to be expected that the appeal would be rejected as inadmissible pursuant to Article 108, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 101(1) EPC. The appellant was informed that any observations had to be filed within two months of notification of the communication and was asked to clarify its request for oral proceedings.
IV. In reply to the board's communication, the appellant withdrew its request for oral proceedings.
Reasons for the Decision
No written statement setting out the grounds of appeal was filed within the time limit provided by Article 108, third sentence, EPC in conjunction with Rule 126(2) and Rule 131(2),(4) EPC. In addition, neither the notice of appeal nor any other document filed contains anything that could be regarded as a statement of grounds pursuant to Article 108 EPC and Rule 99(2) EPC. Therefore, the appeal has to be rejected as inadmissible (Rule 101(1) EPC).
Order
For these reasons it is decided that:
The appeal is rejected as inadmissible.
