DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002256354-0003

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2020-12-07

R0069/2019-3

Contested design: 002256354-0003

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal upheld (reversal)

The contested decision is set aside, the invalidity application is rejected, and the invalidity applicant must bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

Show verbatim operative text(de)

1. Die angefochtene Entscheidung wird aufgehoben. 2. Der Nichtigkeitsantrag wird zurückgewiesen. 3. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und des Beschwerdeverfahrens.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Ningbo Degson Electronics Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction

China (CN)

No. 1585 Xiaolin Road, Cixi, Ningbo, Zhejiang 15321, Volkrepublik China

Represented by

KLAKA Rechtsanwälte

Holder · RCD owner

WAGO Verwaltungsgesellschaft mbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Hansastr. 27, 32423 Minden, Deutschland

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCDD1

electrical connector / printed-circuit-board terminal block

RCD No 1733239-0004 · Community Designs Register certificate

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(2)Article 6(1)Article 8(1)Article 70(1)

Argument summary

  • The design holder appealed the invalidation of its connector design and argued that D1 did not deprive the contested design of individual character.
  • The invalidity applicant argued that the product was invisible in normal use, technically constrained, and too close to D1.
  • The Board held that the informed user would perceive the difference between the contested design's actuation openings and D1's pushers, alongside further housing differences, as sufficient for a different overall impression.
  • The appeal was upheld, the first-instance invalidity decision was annulled, and the invalidity application was rejected.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurE. Fink
  • MemberC. Bartos
  • RegistrarM. 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
R2163/2022-32024-03-05Decision annulledArt 8(1), Art 4(2)7
R0068/2019-32020-12-07Decision annulledArt 8(1), Art 4(2)7
R0878/2022-32023-02-16Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6
R1654/2021-32022-08-25Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6
R1699/2021-32022-08-25Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6
R1693/2021-32022-08-25Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6
R1696/2021-32022-08-25Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6
R1694/2021-32022-08-25Decision confirmedArt 8(1), Art 4(2)6