DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002022772-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-03-25

R2516/2017-3

Contested design: 002022772-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The Board annuls the first-instance decision, declares the contested RCD invalid for lack of individual character, and orders the design holder to bear all costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Annuls the contested decision; 2. Declares the invalidity of the contested RCD; 3. Orders the design holder to bear the invalidity applicant's costs and the fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

PIEJŪRA, SIAvia PDF extraction

LV

"Avoti", Nīcas pagasts, Nīcas novads, LV-3473, Letonia

Holder · RCD owner

GAMMA-A, SIAvia PDF extraction

LV

Traleru iela 30, Rīga, LV-1030, Letonia

Prior art cited (3)

Prior use1

CANPEEL® aluminium container with removable transparent lid, invented by O.Kleiner AG (Switzerland)

Interpack fair, Duesseldorf; O.Kleiner newsletter 'canpeel news' December 2008 · disclosed 2008-05-01

Prior use2⚠ rejected as evidence

Canned sprats in CANPEEL® tin (shown in photograph)

Declaration by O.Kleiner AG and Latvian fish-tinning company

Prior use3⚠ rejected as evidence

Canned sprats in CANPEEL® tin (shown in photograph)

Declaration by O.Kleiner AG and Latvian fish-tinning company

Legal grounds invoked

Article 5Article 6Article 7Article 25(1)(b)Article 56Article 57Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • Invalidity applicant (appellant) argued that earlier design 1 (CANPEEL® tin, exhibited at Interpack 2008 and published in O.Kleiner's newsletter) was properly disclosed and that the RCD reproduces the same features of appearance, producing the same overall impression.
  • Design holder argued that new evidence was belated and that declarations came from non-impartial parties covering commercially confidential dealings; holder did not submit observations at first instance.
  • The Board found design 1 properly disclosed via exhibition at Interpack 2008 and the business newsletter; the Invalidity Division erred in treating the visible food contents as part of the design, since the RCD protects packaging, not its contents.
  • The Board held that the RCD reproduces all features of appearance of the earlier design (same shape, proportions, colours, transparent lid with tab) and thus lacks individual character; the contested decision was annulled and the RCD declared invalid.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurC. Rusconi
  • MemberE. Fink
  • 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 ↗