DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002435768-0034

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2020-01-07

R0486/2018-3

Contested design: 002435768-0034

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed and the applicant is ordered to bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und des Beschwerdeverfahrens.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

EGLO LEUCHTEN GMBHvia PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Heiligkreuz 22, 6136 Pill, Österreich

Represented by

TAYLOR WESSING

Holder · RCD owner

Briloner Leuchten GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Im Kissen 2, 59929 Brilon, Deutschland

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCDD1

ring-shaped lamp (Ringo), registered, published 23 April 2008, expired 10 March 2013

GGM Nr. 894126-0011 · EUIPO Community Designs Bulletin / EGLO Katalog Wohnraumleuchten 2009/10 · disclosed 2008-04-23

CatalogD2

table lamp shown in a single view in the EGLO catalogue 2009/10 (used only by Invalidity Division; not relied on by applicant in appeal)

EGLO Katalog Wohnraumleuchten 2009/10 · EGLO product catalogue 2009/2010 · disclosed 2009-01-01

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6(1)Article 6(2)Article 7(1)Article 8(1)Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant (EGLO) appealed the Invalidity Division's rejection of its invalidity application against Briloner's three-headed ring ceiling luminaire RCD (GGM No 2435768-0034), arguing that only the luminaire head matters for the overall impression, that the mounting arm and number of heads are standard/technical features to be disregarded, and that the shared ring-shaped luminaire head with housing creates the same impression as the earlier GGM No 894126-0011.
  • The design holder (Briloner) sought dismissal, pointing to confirmed Board and General Court decisions dismissing analogous EGLO invalidity applications against similar designs (R 738/2016-3, R 746/2016-3, T-767/17), and arguing all features of the three-headed ceiling fixture must be considered in their entirety.
  • The Board limited the appeal to only the earlier GGM No 894126-0011 (D1) as the sole prior art relied on in the appeal. The contested GGM — a three-headed ceiling fixture — differs from the earlier single wall/ceiling luminaire in the ceiling housing, central rod with three arms, number and arrangement of heads, and the specific form of the luminaire body; the overall impression is entirely different. Prior General Court and Board decisions confirming dismissal of EGLO's analogous applications were applied.
  • The appeal is dismissed; the invalidity application is confirmed rejected.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurE. Fink
  • MemberC. Bartos
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deGermanoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R2453/2023-32024-10-30Decision confirmedArt 6(1)(b)5
R0837/2020-32023-08-30Decision confirmedArt 6(1)(b)5
R0056/2020-32021-04-12Decision confirmedArt 6(1)(b)5
R2349/2019-32020-09-30Decision confirmedArt 6(1)(b)5
R1586/2017-32018-05-24Decision confirmedArt 6(1)(b)5
R1546/2018-32019-01-22Decision annulledArt 6(1)(b)4
R2215/2016-32018-06-29Decision annulledArt 6(1)(b)4
R2216/2016-32018-06-29Decision annulledArt 6(1)(b)4