DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003373083-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-02-02

R0968/2020-3

Contested design: 003373083-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Discontinued / withdrawn

The Board takes note of the withdrawal of the appeal, closes the appeal proceedings, and notes the parties’ agreement on costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Takes note of the withdrawal of the appeal and declares the appeal proceedings closed; 2. Takes note of the agreement on costs concluded by the parties.

CostsNot specified

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Aldi Stores Limitedvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

Holly Lane, Atherstone, Warwickshire CV9 2SQ, United Kingdom

Represented by

FREETHS LLP

Holder · RCD owner

Hydratem8 Limitedvia PDF extraction

United Kingdom (GB)

Unit 6, Five Oaks Business Park, Geddinge Lane, Wootton, Near Canterbury CT4 6RY, United Kingdom

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4Article 6

Argument summary

  • Aldi filed an invalidity application against Hydratem8’s graphic-elements RCD for lack of individual character under Article 25(1)(b) and Article 6 CDR, but the Invalidity Division rejected the application.
  • Aldi appealed, and the design holder filed observations in reply while the parties later pursued settlement discussions.
  • Aldi then withdrew the appeal, and the design holder informed the Registry that the parties had reached an agreement on costs as part of their settlement.
  • The Board closed the appeal proceedings without a merits decision and took note of the parties’ costs agreement.

Deciding panel

  • ChairTh. M. Margellos
  • RapporteurH. Salmi
  • MemberC. Negro
  • RegistrarR. Vidal

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R1962/2020-32022-07-11Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1959/2020-32022-07-11Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1958/2020-32022-07-11Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1960/2020-32022-07-11Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1957/2020-32022-07-11Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1500/2020-32021-01-19Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1501/2020-32021-01-19Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5
R1496/2020-32021-01-19Without deciding on the meritsArt 70(5)5