DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006301891-0007

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-02-17

R2382/2020-3

Contested design: 006301891-0007

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed; the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder’s costs.

Show verbatim operative text(fr)

1. Le recours est rejeté; 2. La demanderesse en nullité devra supporter les frais engagés par la titulaire du modèle.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Saverglassvia PDF extraction

France (FR)

3, rue de la Gare, 60960 Feuquières, France

Represented by

Novagraaf France

Holder · RCD owner

Discovia PDF extraction

France (FR)

Avenue des Torulas, 16100 Merpins, France

Represented by

IN Concreto

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD

carafes / bottles prior design

RCD No 2 621 763-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-01-30

Web disclosure

DISTIL’ER product shown in Saverglass online catalogue

www.saverglass.com · Saverglass website

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 5Article 6(1)Article 7

Argument summary

  • Saverglass sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over earlier RCD No 2 621 763-0001 and the online DISTIL’ER product disclosure.
  • Disco argued that the applicant distorted proportions, that the compared containers differed in key features, and that the challenged design remained new and individually distinctive.
  • The Board admitted the online catalogue extract at appeal stage but found the contested carafe created a different overall impression on the informed user.
  • The appeal was dismissed; the contested design retained individual character and, a fortiori, novelty.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • MemberM. Bra
  • MemberA. Szanyi Felkl
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frFrenchoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R0116/2025-32025-07-14Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0115/2025-32025-07-14Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1669/2023-32024-11-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2453/2023-32024-10-30Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0952/2021-32024-09-16Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2140/2023-32024-08-14Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2585/2023-32024-08-06Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1745/2023-32024-06-25Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5