DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002308932-0002

Restitutio in integrum · 2020-05-12

R2243/2019-3

Contested design: 002308932-0002

CDRRCD lapsed at decision

Outcome

Restitutio refused

The appeal is dismissed.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen.

CostsNot specified

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

DMG MORI SEIKI CO., LTD.via PDF extraction

Japan (JP)

106, Kitakoriyama-cho, Yamatokoriyama-shi, Nara 639-1160, Japan

Holder · RCD owner

No opposing holder — Restitutio in integrum.

Legal grounds invoked

Art 13(3)Art 67(1)

From EUIPO API metadata.

Argument summary

  • DMG MORI SEIKI CO., LTD. and DMG MORI AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT (joint applicants/holders) appealed the rejection of their restitutio in integrum request for reinstatement into the time-limit for renewing RCD registration No 2 308 932 (36 computer icons); they argued their representative's PatOrg software system operated correctly and that a single inexplicable isolated error in an otherwise well-functioning firm cannot constitute a lack of due care.
  • The Office (Operations Department) found that the missed renewal was caused by the representative's own error in controlling and cross-checking whether renewal tasks had been completed, attributable to an insufficient internal control mechanism.
  • The Board confirmed that restitutio requires all due care in the circumstances; human administrative errors are not extraordinary or unforeseeable; the representative was unable to identify why the error occurred, revealing an absence of a second verification step capable of catching such errors.
  • The appeal is dismissed; the applicants and their representative failed to meet the strict due-care standard under Article 67(1) CDR and the restitutio request was rightly refused.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurA. Szanyi Felkl
  • MemberE. Fink
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)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
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7
R2243/2019-32020-05-12Decision confirmedArt 67(1), Art 13(3)7