Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2020-05-19
R1253/2019-3
Contested design: 003098664-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the design holder is ordered to bear all costs; the first-instance decision declaring the contested RCD invalid for lack of individual character is confirmed.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
McCain Foods Limitedvia PDF extraction
CA
8800 Main Street, Florenceville-Bristol, New Brunswick E7L 1B2, Canada
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
J.R. Simplot Companyvia PDF extraction
United States (US)
10999 W. Front Street, Boise, Idaho 83702, United States of America
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
Potato shapes, published in Community Designs Bulletin on 23 November 2010
RCD No 1 769 167-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2010-11-23
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder (appellant) argued the contested RCD and the prior design produce different overall impressions because the contested RCD has two-and-a-half twists, a straight axis, a circular front/rear view with a hole, and different cross-section compared to the prior twisted wedge design.
- ›The invalidity applicant argued the differences (additional half twist, slightly more curved line, lighter shadows) are not noticeable and the designs produce the same overall impression; the degree of freedom in potato shapes is unlimited.
- ›The Board found the informed user is a general consumer of potato products; designer freedom in potato shapes is broad; both designs share the same oblong twisted shape with constant breadth decreasing to thinner ends.
- ›The additional half twist in the contested RCD is perceived as a minor variation/continuation of the prior design rather than a distinctive feature; differences in cross-section, amplitude and shading are minimal or not verifiable from the graphic representations.
- ›Appeal dismissed: the contested RCD lacks individual character over RCD No 1 769 167-0001.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberC. Negro
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0181/2025-3 | 2025-05-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |