Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-01-22
R1546/2018-3
Contested design: 000733282-0001
Outcome
The appeal is partially upheld: the contested decision is annulled insofar as it was based on prior designs D1 to D17, the case is remitted for continued examination of the invalidity application based on D18 to D22, and each party bears its own appeal costs.
Show verbatim operative text(es)
1. Estimar el recurso anulando la resolución impugnada en cuanto se basa en los dibujos anteriores D1 a D17; 2. Devolver el asunto a la División de Anulación para que prosiga la tramitación de la solicitud de declaración de nulidad basada en los dibujos o modelos D18 a D22; 3. Ordenar que cada parte soporte sus costas en el procedimiento de recurso.
CostsEach party bears its own costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
GIF DIFUSIÓNvia PDF extraction
France (FR)
Zona Industrielle de la Barbière, BP 79, 47301 Vilenve-sur-Lot, Francia
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
CROCS, INC.via PDF extraction
United States (US)
7477 East Dry Creek Parkway, Niwot Colorado 80503, Estados Unidos de América
Represented by
Prior art cited (20)
prior Community design for footwear/clog
257 001-0001 · Boletín de Dibujos y Modelos Comunitarios · disclosed 2005-02-08
"Dawgs" clog shown in a website screenshot
website screenshot
"Danaud" clog
French magazine advertisement
"Blachette" clog
catalog
"Dansko" clog
magazine
"Oomfes" clog
magazine
"UGG 2004" clog
magazine
"simple" clog
magazine
"Powerpuff Girls" clog
magazine
"Rocketdog" clog
magazine
"Foamtreza" footwear
magazine
"UGG 2005" clog
L’Essentiel de la Chaussure
"Mellow Yellow" clog
L’Essentiel de la Chaussure
"Quelle" clog
L’Essentiel de la Chaussure
"Romika" footwear
L’Essentiel de la Chaussure
"Dresco" clog
L’Essentiel de la Chaussure
"Sabot d’Yves" clog
Chausser Magazine
prior Community design for footwear/clog
333 281-0007
prior Community design for footwear/clog
333 281-0030
"Holey Soles" clog
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing that the contested Crocs design remained novel and had individual character over D1 and that several other cited disclosures lacked adequate proof or were materially different.
- ›The invalidity applicant maintained that the contested footwear lacked novelty and individual character in light of D1 and the other earlier clogs and disclosures cited in the invalidity application.
- ›The Board found that D1 created a different overall impression because of the visible fur lining, absence of a heel strap, and non-perforated trapezoidal elements of the contested design.
- ›For D2 to D17, the Board held that the cited items either lacked sufficient proof of disclosure or were not identical apart from insignificant details; issues relating to D18 to D22 had to be remitted because they had not been decided.
- ›The appeal was partially upheld, the invalidity decision was annulled insofar as it relied on D1 to D17, and the case was remitted for further examination based on D18 to D22.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberC. Negro
- 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 ↗ |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2453/2023-3 | 2024-10-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 4(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 8 |
| R0056/2020-3 | 2021-04-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 4(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b) | — | 8 |
| R0823/2024-3 | 2025-06-18 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R0837/2020-3 | 2021-11-30 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R0331/2021-3 | 2021-08-23 | Decision annulled | Art 4(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0459/2016-G | 2018-02-12 | Decision annulled | Art 4(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2322/2024-3 | 2025-05-21 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1)(b), Art 5(1)(b), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |
| R1434/2024-3 | 2024-12-11 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 4(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |