T 3032/19 () of 30.4.2020

European Case Law Identifier: ECLI:EP:BA:2020:T303219.20200430
Date of decision: 30 April 2020
Case number: T 3032/19
Application number: 15196868.2
IPC class: G08G5/00
Language of proceedings: EN
Distribution: D
Download and more information:
Decision text in EN (PDF, 230 KB)
Documentation of the appeal procedure can be found in the Register
Bibliographic information is available in: EN
Versions: Unpublished
Title of application: Systems and Method for Wirelessly and Securely Updating a Terrain Awareness Warning System Database
Applicant name: Honeywell International Inc.
Opponent name: -
Board: 3.5.02
Headnote: -
Relevant legal provisions:
European Patent Convention Art 108 (2007)
European Patent Convention R 101(1) (2007)
Keywords: Admissibility of appeal - missing statement of grounds
Request for oral proceedings only for discussion on the merits, not admissibility
Catchwords:

-

Cited decisions:
-
Citing decisions:
-

Summary of Facts and Submissions

I. The appeal is directed against the decision of the Examining Division, posted on 16 May 2019.

II. The appellant filed a notice of appeal on 12 July 2019 and paid the appeal fee on the same day. They requested oral proceedings if the Board, after review of its written arguments, considered maintaining the impugned decision.

III. By communication of 22 November 2019, received by the appellant, the Registry of 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.

IV. No reply was received.

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) 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.

The appellant merely requested oral proceedings if the Board did not follow its written arguments. No written arguments were filed by the appellant. There was no request for oral proceedings in the case of a decision concerning the admissibility of the appeal. Thus no oral proceedings had to be held.

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.

Quick Navigation