Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-02-01
R1856/2019-3
Contested design: 000516836-0007
Outcome
The contested decision is set aside, the Community design No 516836-0007 is declared invalid, and the holder must bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Die angefochtene Entscheidung wird aufgehoben. 2. Das Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster Nr. 516836-0007 wird für nichtig erklärt. 3. Die Inhaberin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und des Beschwerdeverfahrens.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
CUKI COFRESCO S.R.L.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Strada Brandizzo, 130, 10088 Volpiano (TO), Italien
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Novelis Deutschland GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Hannoversche Str. 1, 37075 Göttingen, Deutschland
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
German patent specification for a grill tray and method for its manufacture
DE 195 29 005 · German patent publication · disclosed 1996-08-01
Various additional catalog extracts, patents, utility model publications, and earlier design registrations submitted to show the prior art of round and semi-circular grill trays
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued the grill-tray design lacked individual character and that its features were technically dictated, relying mainly on German patent DE 195 29 005 and additional prior-art materials showing grill-tray forms.
- ›The holder argued the contested design remained new and individual, stressing differences in shape, wave pattern, perforations, and rim orientation, and also challenged the appeal’s admissibility because the appellant had changed corporate form through merger.
- ›The Board held the appeal admissible because CUKI COFRESCO S.R.L. had succeeded the original applicant by merger, then found the contested design created no different overall impression from D1 despite the half-round shape.
- ›The appeal succeeded: D1 destroyed individual character, the contested decision was annulled, and the RCD was declared invalid without needing to examine the Article 8 grounds further.
Deciding panel
- ChairTh. M. Margellos
- RapporteurE. Fink
- MemberC. Bartos
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2443/2020-3 | 2023-01-17 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0068/2022-3 | 2023-01-09 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0093/2022-3 | 2022-10-25 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0092/2022-3 | 2022-10-25 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2427/2023-3 | 2024-07-31 | Decision partially annulled | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |
| R2422/2022-3 | 2024-01-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |
| R1562/2022-3 | 2023-05-31 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |
| R1103/2022-3 | 2023-02-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 6 |