R2361/2018-3

• ›Invalidity applicant (Aroma Essence) appealed the Invalidity Division's rejection of its invalidity claim against washing sponge/soap bar RCD No 2 034 009-0009, arguing all conflicting designs are rectangular sponges with wide light layer and thinner dark layer in 1:4 ratio; holes are technical features not design features; the Invalidity Division incorrectly identified the informed user as a seller; the designs have no top/bottom orientation.
• ›Design holder (REFAN BULGARIA) argued the designs differ in overall shape (cubic vs rectangular), layer proportions, colour contrast and hole size/density; the product has a defined top and bottom; the informed user includes both professionals and consumers; the sponge holes are visible design features.
• ›The Board found the contested RCD and D1 differ in overall shape (broader cubic vs longer narrower rectangular), layer arrangement and ratio (thin dark base/large bright top vs inverse), and visible sponge holes creating irregular contour; the Board noted D2 was incorrectly represented in the contested decision (procedural error) but exercised jurisdiction to decide directly; the contested RCD also differs sufficiently from D2 (three layers vs two) and D3 (different proportions and hole density).
• ›Appeal dismissed; the contested RCD has individual character vis-à-vis all three prior designs; invalidity applicant bears costs.

• ChairTh. M. Margellos
• MemberG. Humphreys
• MemberM. Bra
• RegistrarH. Dijkema

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