← Back to search
Restitutio in integrum · 2020-05-12
R2243/2019-3
Contested design: 002308932-0033
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
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
No opposing holder — Restitutio in integrum.
Legal grounds invoked
Article 67(1)Article 67(2)Article 67(3)Article 13(2)Article 56Article 57
Argument summary
- ›Appellants (holders) sought restitutio in integrum after failing to renew GGM registration No. 2 308 932 (Icons for computers) by the deadline, relying on their PatOrg software system and claiming the isolated error of an otherwise well-functioning system should be excused.
- ›No opposing party; Office had denied restitutio at first instance, finding the representative's oversight system lacked an adequate verification step.
- ›The Board held that Article 67(1) CDR requires all due care to have been taken; human error in an office is foreseeable and not extraordinary, and the representative had no dual-check mechanism to confirm renewals were actually submitted.
- ›The Board concluded the due-care standard was not met; the missed deadline was attributable to a negligent failure in the representative's control system and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurA. Szanyi Felkl
- MemberE. Fink
- Registrarp.o. M. Chaleva
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |
| R2243/2019-3 | 2020-05-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 67(1), Art 13(3) | — | 7 |