Other appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-02-04

R1118/2018-3

Contested design: 004355667-0002

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal against the examiner's rejection of Community design application No 4355667-0002 is dismissed.

Show verbatim operative text

Dismisses the appeal.

CostsNot specified

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Polder Products, LLCvia PDF extraction

United States (US)

195 Christian Street, Oxford, Connecticut 06478, United States of America

Represented by

Holder · RCD owner

No opposing holder — Other appeal · Board of Appeal.

Article 46(3)Article 67(2)Article 67(3)Article 60(1)Article 57

›Applicant (appellant) had filed a Community design application with inconsistent views (dotted lines in one view but not the other); was given a two-month deadline to remedy the deficiency, which it missed.
›Applicant argued the missed deadline was due to a representative's docketing mistake for which the applicant should not be held responsible, citing exceptional circumstances.
›The Board held that the purpose of the appeal is a re-examination on the merits, not reinstatement of missed time limits; the appropriate remedy for a missed time limit was restitutio in integrum under Article 67 CDR, which the applicant had not properly pursued.
›The Board also noted a professional representative's errors are attributed to the applicant and that a docketing mistake is neither exceptional nor unforeseeable; the applicant had also not completed the omitted act (withdrawal of deficient view).
›Appeal dismissed.

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 ↗