← Back to search
Other appeal · Board of Appeal · 2018-08-27
R0182/2018-3
Contested design: 001456933-0001
CDRAppellant: applicant
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
The appeal is dismissed but the examiner is ordered to return the five specimen copies to the applicant.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal ; 2. Orders the examiner to return the five copies of the specimen attached to the application to the applicant.
CostsNo costs order
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
FUJIFILM Corporationvia PDF extraction
Japan (JP)
tr26-30 Nishiazabu 2-chome Minato-ku, Tokyo 106-8620, Japan
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
No opposing holder — Other appeal · Board of Appeal.
Legal grounds invoked
Article 36(1)Article 50(1)Article 56Article 57Article 64(1)Article 10(1)Article 10(2)Article 10(3)Article 12(1)Article 12(2)Article 65(1)(a)Article 65(2)
Argument summary
- ›Applicant (FUJIFILM) argued its withdrawal of CD application No 1 456 933 was conditional upon return of specimens as advised by the examiner by telephone, and therefore void; it also argued the application met Article 10(1) CDIR requirements for a filing date and any remaining deficiencies were minor and correctable.
- ›No opposing private party; this is an ex-parte appeal against an Office examination decision refusing to cancel the withdrawal.
- ›The Board held the withdrawal request was unconditional on its face and a withdrawal of a withdrawal is not possible under consistent case-law; it rejected the conditional-withdrawal argument.
- ›However, the Board found no legal basis for the Office's refusal to return the specimens (Decision EX-13-4 applies only to Article 65(1)(a) CDIR documents, not specimens under Article 65(2)); it ordered the examiner to return the five specimen copies.
- ›Appeal dismissed as regards reversing the withdrawal; partial relief granted on specimen return.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarI. Romero Conrad
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1762/2018-3 | 2020-03-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 12(2) | — | 3 |
| R1936/2019-3 | 2020-07-27 | Without deciding on the merits | Art 12(2) | — | 2 |