DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002921304-0002

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-01-16

R2600/2017-3

Contested design: 002921304-0002

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed and the design holder is ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders that the design holder bear the invalidity applicant's costs in the appeal proceedings.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

RUBIK'S BRAND LIMITEDvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

7 Lambton Place, London W11 2SH, United Kingdom

Represented by

CABINET LAVOIX

Holder · RCD owner

East Sheen Industrial Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction

Taiwan (TW)

No. 287-21, Fang Jen Rd., Renwu Dist., Kaohsiung City 814, Taiwan

Prior art cited (1)

Trade mark

Rubik's Cube puzzle toy (3D shape)

EUTM No 9 975 681 · EUIPO / www.uk.rubiks.com (as of March 2014) · disclosed 2012-01-01

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6Article 8Article 4Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • Design holder (appellant) argued the RCD (two-cube key ring) had individual character because it consisted of two cubes in a complex arrangement—unlike the single-cube earlier EUTM—producing a completely different overall impression; also sought suspension pending EUTM validity challenge.
  • Invalidity applicant submitted no observations on appeal.
  • The Board found both designs produced the same overall impression because the key decorative element (the cube's grid structure of four squares per side divided by black lines) was almost identical in both; the doubling of the cube did not eliminate the 'déjà vu' effect, and the ring/chain accessories were standardised and carried minimal weight.
  • The Board upheld the invalidity on Article 6 CDR grounds; the differences (two cubes vs one, corner union) were insufficient given the designer's very broad freedom over key-ring decorative objects.
  • Appeal dismissed; design holder bears costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurC. Rusconi
  • MemberH. Salmi
  • 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 ↗