Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-05-18
R0492/2020-3
Contested design: 005844206-0001
Outcome
The contested decision is annulled, the contested Community design is declared invalid, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant’s costs and fees.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Annuls the contested decision and declares Community design No 5 844 206-0001 invalid; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Jabier Penas Marañonvia PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Arene 25 3º C Algorta (BIZKAIA), 48991 Algorta, Spain
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Afishal Music Limitedvia PDF extraction
United Kingdom (GB)
Unit 2 Midway Redbourn Road, Hemel Hempstead Hertfordshire HP2 7BB, United Kingdom
Represented by
Michael Philip Downing
Prior art cited (1)
stand with sixteen semicircular panels and lighting elements
United Kingdom national design No 5 002 179 · United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office / UK designs journal · disclosed 2016-03-29
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested stand design lacked novelty and individual character over an earlier UK national design showing the same sixteen-panel arrangement.
- ›The design holder argued that differences in panel heights, shapes, and the position of light-emitting elements created a different overall impression.
- ›The Board found that both designs shared the same dominant structure and arrangement, and that the lighting-position differences were only minor variations for the informed user.
- ›The appeal was allowed, the contested decision was annulled, and the contested RCD was declared invalid.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberM. Bra
- Registrarp.o. R. Vidal
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2504/2022-3 | 2023-06-28 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2030/2022-3 | 2023-06-07 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2415/2018-3 | 2023-03-01 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2416/2018-3 | 2023-03-01 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2417/2018-3 | 2023-03-01 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2443/2020-3 | 2023-01-17 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0068/2022-3 | 2023-01-09 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0092/2022-3 | 2022-10-25 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |