DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 001920810-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2020-11-19

R1213/2019-3

Contested design: 001920810-0001

CDRAppellant: holdermedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Appeal upheld (reversal)

The contested decision is annulled, the invalidity application is rejected, and the invalidity applicant must reimburse EUR 1,700 in costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The contested decision is annulled. 2. Rejects the application for a declaration of invalidity. 3. Orders the applicant to bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings. 4. Fixes the amount of the costs to be reimbursed by the applicant to the proprietor for the invalidity and appeal proceedings at EUR 1,700.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €1,700

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Daniel Abartvia PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Schleppe Platz 6, 9020 Klagenfurt, Austria

Holder · RCD owner

Hannes Lafnervia PDF extraction

Austria (AT)

Tulferberg 51, 6075 Tulfes, Austria

Represented by

Franz-Martin Orou

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureD1⚠ rejected as evidence

carafe with wooden ball closure ('Ypsilon + ZKugel')

Amazon ASIN B07258T5CN · amazon.de product listing printout

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5Article 7(1)Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • The proprietor argued that the Amazon printout did not prove pre-filing disclosure because the ASIN and displayed 'listed since' date could be created or backdated after 2011.
  • The invalidity applicant maintained that the Amazon listing, ASIN history and emails from Amazon proved the identical carafe had been offered since 1 May 2010.
  • The Board found the proprietor's later Amazon correspondence and ASIN analysis more persuasive: the ASIN was created only in 2017 and the listing date shown on Amazon was editable and backdated.
  • Because D1 did not prove disclosure of an identical earlier design before filing, the invalidity application failed; the appeal succeeded and the invalidity applicant was ordered to pay costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurE. Fink
  • MemberC. Bartos
  • RegistrarP.O. M. Chaleva

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
R1043/2018-32020-09-03Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R1042/2018-32020-09-03Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R1399/2017-32019-07-10Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R2215/2016-32018-06-29Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R2216/2016-32018-06-29Decision annulledArt 7(1)5
R0732/2024-32025-03-03Decision confirmedArt 7(1)4
R1434/2024-32024-12-11Remitted (further prosecution)Art 7(1)4
R2336/2022-32023-11-27Decision confirmedArt 7(1)4