← Back to search
Restitutio in integrum · 2020-05-12
R2245/2019-3
Contested design: 002309203-0018
CDRRCD lapsed at decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
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 56Article 57Article 13(2)Article 37Article 13(1)
Argument summary
- ›Appellants (design holders) argued their representative used properly organised software (PatOrg) that auto-generated renewal deadlines, written instructions to renew were given, and an isolated unexplained human error in an otherwise well-functioning system should not defeat a restitutio request.
- ›No opposing private party; the Office (EUIPO) had refused the restitutio application at first instance on the ground that the representative failed to exercise due diligence in the deadline-monitoring system.
- ›The Board held that due diligence under Article 67(1) CDR requires an internal deadline-control system that generally excludes inadvertent failures; the representative could not explain when or why the error occurred, demonstrating a structural gap in the control mechanism.
- ›The appeal was dismissed; the failure to renew RCD No. 2 309 203 on time remained unremedied.
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 |