← Back to search
Other appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-01-07
R2243/2017-3
Contested design: 002530592-0001
CDRAppellant: applicant
Outcome
Appeal upheld (reversal)
The contested refusal decision is annulled; the application for registration of design No 2 530 592-0001 is accepted and remitted to the Operations Department for further prosecution.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Annuls the contested decision; 2. Accepts the application for registration of the design No 2 530 592-0001; 3. Remits the case to the Operations Department for further prosecution.
CostsNot specified
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
AmTRAN Technology Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction
Taiwan (TW)
17F., No. 268, Liancheng Rd., Jhonghe District, New Taipei City 23553, Taiwan
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
No opposing holder — Other appeal · Board of Appeal.
Legal grounds invoked
Article 57Article 66Article 62Article 60Article 67
Argument summary
- ›The applicant (AmTRAN Technology) appealed the examiner's refusal of Community Design application No 2 530 592-0001, arguing it never received the examination report of 5 September 2014 or the refusal decision of 28 November 2014 in its User Area, and submitted amended views with the appeal; a statutory declaration and fax-journal printouts were provided to challenge the Office's IT records showing receipt.
- ›The Office's technicians stated the documents had been correctly sent and that the examination report was read on 9 September 2014; the applicant contested these records as corrupted, presenting User Area printouts showing no EUIPO communications for the period.
- ›The Board found the IT evidence inconclusive and ambiguous, applied the benefit of the doubt to the applicant under Article 54 CDIR, established the date of receipt as 6 October 2017, and held the appeal admissible; since the examination report could not be proved to have been duly notified, the refusal decision was annulled for breach of Article 62 CDR.
- ›The Board accepted the amended views (submitted with the appeal) and remitted the case for registration; no costs order was made.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
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 ↗ |