Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2018-10-30
R1334/2018-3
Contested design: 002343244-0001
Outcome
The appeal is upheld; the contested RCD No 2 343 244-0001 is declared invalid; the design holder is ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs fixed at EUR 2 050.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Upholds the appeal; 2. Orders that the design holder bears the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings; 3. Fixes the costs to be reimbursed by the design holder to the invalidity applicant for the invalidity and appeal proceedings at EUR 2 050.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €2,050
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
SOLEN CIKOLATA GIDA SANAYI VE TICARET ANONIM SIRKETIvia PDF extraction
Türkiye (TR)
4. Organize Sanayi Bölgesi, 83412 nolu Cadde No:4 Sehitkamil, Gaziantep, Turkey
Represented by
Teodora Valentinova Tsenova-Petrova
Holder · RCD owner
Elka Zaharievavia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
"Rodopi" str. N8, 4000 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Represented by
Atanas Kostov
Prior art cited (1)
cocoa, cakes, chocolates, chocolate creams, cakes with cocoa milk, chocolate cream (Class 30); OZMO cornet word/figurative mark
International Registration No 1 148 957 · WIPO/International Register · disclosed 2012-07-10
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›Invalidity applicant (appellant) sought invalidation of the ice-cream cornet packaging RCD under Article 25(1)(e) CDR based on earlier International Registration No 1 148 957 (OZMO cornet mark); the Invalidity Division and first Board decision dismissed the application, finding no likelihood of confusion as the relevant public was limited to professional confectionery consumers.
- ›The design holder maintained the signs were visually and aurally dissimilar, sharing only the non-distinctive word 'cornet', and that there was no likelihood of confusion.
- ›The General Court (T-794/16) annulled the prior Board decision, finding consumers of ice cream also form part of the relevant public, the goods are similar due to complementarity, and the signs are highly similar visually and phonetically, leading to likelihood of confusion.
- ›The Board implemented the GC judgment under Article 61(6) CDR, upheld the invalidity request in full and fixed costs at EUR 2 050 payable by the design holder.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- MemberC. Rusconi
- MemberH. Salmi
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0136/2021-3 | 2023-08-07 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R1332/2018-3 | 2018-10-30 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R1063/2023-3 | 2024-11-11 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R0912/2023-3 | 2023-12-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R1017/2023-3 | 2023-12-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R1016/2023-3 | 2023-12-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R0136/2021-3 | 2022-05-31 | Case suspended | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R2043/2019-3 | 2020-11-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |