DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002419424-0004

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2018-05-07

R2122/2017-3

Contested design: 002419424-0004

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal upheld (reversal)

The contested Invalidity Division decision is annulled and the invalidity application is rejected; the invalidity applicant is ordered to bear costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Annuls the contested decision and rejects the application for a declaration of invalidity; 2. Orders the invalidity applicant to bear the fees and costs incurred by the RCD holder.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

INDECO S.A.via PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Grzybowska 87, 00-844 Warszawa, Poland

Holder · RCD owner

BONARI Sp. z o.o.via PDF extraction

Poland (PL)

ul. Zwycięzców 42/53, 03-938 Warszawa, Poland

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD⚠ rejected as evidence

profiles for doors

Community design No 2 129 601-0003 · EUIPO designs bulletin · disclosed 2014-04-14

Catalog⚠ rejected as evidence

invalidity applicant's product catalogue (profiles for doors)

invalidity applicant (INDECO S.A.) · disclosed 2005-01-01

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6(1)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The RCD holder (BONARI) appealed the Invalidity Division's decision that declared RCD 2 419 424-0004 (profiles for doors) invalid for lack of individual character over a prior catalogue design; holder argued the catalogue was not proven to have been disclosed to relevant specialist circles before the filing date.
  • The invalidity applicant (INDECO) did not file any observations in reply on appeal.
  • The Board found that the catalogue evidence on its own was insufficient to prove disclosure within the meaning of Article 7(1) CDR — there was no proof of when, where, and to what extent the catalogues were distributed, nor whether they reached the specialist circles in the EU.
  • The Board annulled the first-instance decision and rejected the invalidity application; the invalidity applicant was ordered to pay costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurH. Salmi
  • MemberG. Humphreys
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R2167/2023-32024-06-10Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R2443/2020-32023-01-17Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R0068/2022-32023-01-09Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R0092/2022-32022-10-25Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R0093/2022-32022-10-25Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R0811/2021-32021-10-26Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R1434/2020-32021-06-25Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R1856/2019-32021-02-01Decision annulledArt 7(1)5