DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003023381-0005

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2019-07-23

R2749/2017-3

Contested design: 003023381-0005

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

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

Show verbatim operative text(es)

1. Desestimar el recurso. 2. Ordenar que la solicitante de nulidad sufrague las costas de la titular.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

FABULOUS CIPHER, LDA.via PDF extraction

Portugal (PT)

Rua da Mabor, 104, Braga- Vilanova de Famalicâo - Lousado, 4760 813 Lousado, Portugal

Represented by

GARRIGUES IP, S.L.P.

Holder · RCD owner

PARFOIS - BARATA & RAMILO, S.A.via PDF extraction

Portugal (PT)

Rua do Sistelo, 755 - Lugar de Santegãos, 4435-429 Rio Tinto, Portugal

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosure

Zara store checkout counter / shop interior

www.retail-week.com, 14 March 2012 · www.retail-week.com · disclosed 2012-03-14

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5Article 6Article 25(1)(c)Article 25(1)(d)Article 25(1)(e)Article 25(1)(f)Article 25(1)(g)Article 28(1)(b)Article 63Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • Applicant (appellant) sought invalidity of RCD No 003023381-0005 (shop checkout counter area) for lack of individual character over the 'Zara' prior design (retail-week.com, 2012) and additional expert-report designs.
  • The holder argued only 'Zara' was validly invoked; expert report designs lacked individual comparisons, and the RCD checkout counter was distinguished by single-body design, integrated LED frame, brand signage, different colour palette, and single background screen.
  • The Board confirmed that expert-report-only designs were inadmissible and that the 'Zara' model was properly disclosed in 2012.
  • The Board found the RCD and the 'Zara' design produce different overall impressions — differing counter length and design, background wall treatment, colour scheme (white vs. dark), and lighting — and dismissed the appeal.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurC. Rusconi
  • MemberH. Salmi
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗