← Back to search
Restitutio in integrum · 2022-03-15
R1433/2021-3
Contested design: 002712885-0001
RCD lapsed at decision
Outcome
Restitutio refused
The appeal is dismissed.
Show verbatim operative text
Dismisses the appeal.
CostsNo costs order
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Optimedica Corporationvia PDF extraction
United States (US)
1700 E. St. Andrew Place, Santa Ana 92705, United States of America
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
No opposing holder — Restitutio in integrum.
Legal grounds invoked
Article 67
Argument summary
- ›The RCD holder sought restitutio in integrum after both registrations expired when no renewal request or fees were received by EUIPO within the ordinary and grace periods.
- ›It blamed the lapse on failures in the renewal workflow involving CPA Global and Johnson & Johnson after a merger-related change, and argued that all due care had otherwise been taken.
- ›The Board held that Article 67 CDR requires a reliable monitoring and verification system and found the explanations too weak to show that all due care had been taken in handling renewals.
- ›The appeal was dismissed; restitutio was rightly refused and the expired registrations were not reinstated.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- MemberA. Szanyi Felkl
- MemberM. Bra
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |