← Back to search
Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-02-03
R2062/2019-3
Contested design: 000699194-0004
CDRAppellant: applicantmedium-confidence extraction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
The appeal is dismissed and the invalidity applicant must bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Antragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und des Beschwerdeverfahrens.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
XXXLutz KGvia PDF extraction
Austria (AT)
Römerstraße 39, 4600 Wels, Österreich
Holder · RCD owner
Franke Technology and Trademark Ltdvia PDF extraction
Switzerland (CH)
Sonnenbergstraße 9, 6052 Hergiswil, Schweiz
Legal grounds invoked
Article 25(1)(b)Article 8(1)
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested draining-mat/cutting-board design, including its square-section rods and end bands, was entirely the product of technical constraints and therefore invalid under Article 8(1) CDR.
- ›The design holder replied that the visible configuration of rods, bands and profiling reflected aesthetic decisions and that comparable products could achieve similar functions with different appearances.
- ›The Board held that the applicant had not proved that all relevant features were solely dictated by technical function, stressing the design significance of the chosen structure for a visible kitchen accessory.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the invalidity applicant was ordered to bear the costs of both instances.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurA. Szanyi Felkl
- MemberC. Bartos
- Registrarp.o. M. Chaleva
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0494/2023-3 | 2024-03-19 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0862/2023-3 | 2024-02-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0861/2023-3 | 2024-02-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R2289/2022-3 | 2023-12-13 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R2068/2019-3 | 2023-06-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0878/2022-3 | 2023-02-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R0485/2021-3 | 2022-09-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |
| R1694/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 8(1) | — | 7 |