Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2021-11-16
R2281/2020-3
Contested design: 005650546-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the invalidity applicant is ordered to bear the design holder’s costs.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the invalidity applicant to bear the costs incurred by the design holder.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Henkel AG & Co. KGaAvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
IP Department (CLI), Henkelstrasse 67, 40589 Düsseldorf, Germany
Represented by
Jörg Schmidt
Holder · RCD owner
Reckitt Benckiser Finish B.V.via PDF extraction
Netherlands (NL)
Siriusdreef 14, 2132 WT Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
dosage packaging for washing agents
RCD No 3 619 717-0010 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2019-05-07
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant claimed that the contested washing-capsule design conflicted with its earlier RCD because both designs shared the same rotating-wheel arrangement of four outer compartments around a central core.
- ›The holder argued that the prior design’s dotted outer line was disclaimed and that the shapes, spacing and surface structure of the compartments created a clearly different overall impression.
- ›The Board found significant differences in the teardrop shape and spacing of the prior design’s compartments and in the irregular undulating surface of the prior design compared with the flatter disc-like appearance of the contested RCD.
- ›The contested RCD was therefore not in conflict with the prior design, and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurM. Bra
- MemberS. Rizzo
- RegistrarR. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1787/2021-3 | 2022-06-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2282/2020-3 | 2022-05-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2283/2020-3 | 2022-05-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2285/2020-3 | 2022-05-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2286/2020-3 | 2022-05-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2284/2020-3 | 2022-05-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2020-3 | 2021-02-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |
| R2114/2019-3 | 2020-09-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(d) | — | 5 |