← Back to search
Other appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-02-12
R0698/2018-3
Contested design: 001993320-0001
CDRAppellant: applicantRCD lapsed at decision
Outcome
Appeal inadmissible
The appeal against the rejection of the restitutio in integrum request is dismissed as inadmissible.
Show verbatim operative text
Dismisses the appeal as inadmissible.
CostsNot specified
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Hisense Ronshen (Guangdong) Refrigerator Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction
China (CN)
No 8 Ronggang Road, Ronggui, Shunde Foshan, Guangdong, People's Republic of China
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
No opposing holder — Other appeal · Board of Appeal.
Legal grounds invoked
Article 57Article 35(1)Article 67(2)
Argument summary
- ›Design holder (appellant) appealed the rejection of its restitutio in integrum request; the RCD had lapsed on 16 February 2017 due to non-renewal and the restitutio request was filed late (29 November 2017, outside the Article 67(2) CDR time limit).
- ›Design holder's representative claimed a genuine docketing mistake caused the appeal to be filed on 16 April 2018, three days after the deadline of 13 April 2018, and that good faith should render the appeal admissible.
- ›The Board found the appeal notice was filed beyond the two-month time limit of Article 57 CDR and was therefore inadmissible under Article 35(1) CDIR; good faith of the representative is not a valid ground for excusing a late filing.
- ›The Board also rejected the request for an oral hearing as the written submissions were sufficient and no additional relevant information could be expected from oral proceedings.
- ›Appeal dismissed as inadmissible.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurC. Negro
- 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 ↗ |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0699/2018-3 | 2018-10-22 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 5 |
| R0700/2018-3 | 2018-10-22 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 5 |
| R0439/2019-3 | 2019-07-08 | Without deciding on the merits | Art 35(1) | — | 4 |
| R0701/2018-3 | 2019-02-12 | Appeal Inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 4 |
| R2384/2023-3 | 2024-01-24 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 3 |
| R1172/2022-3 | 2022-12-02 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 3 |
| R1171/2022-3 | 2022-11-30 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 3 |
| R2022/2021-3 | 2022-06-21 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 3 |