Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-03-23
R0616/2021-3
Contested design: 001180244-0003
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant’s costs and fees in both instances.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 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
Globus Fachmärkte GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Zechenstraße 8, 66333 Völklingen, Germany
Holder · RCD owner
Metalkas Sp. z o.o.via PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
ul. Deszczowa nr 63, 85-467 Bydgoszcz, Poland
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
shelf unit
CZ 16654 U1 · Czech Patent Office publication · disclosed 2006-08-16
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant relied principally on Czech Utility Model No CZ 16654 U1 for a shelf unit and argued that the contested RCD created the same overall impression.
- ›The design holder pointed to differences in notches, shelf corners, and frame texture, and also invoked functional and design-corpus considerations.
- ›The Board agreed that the Czech utility model had been disclosed and that, given the high design freedom for such shelving, the contested RCD lacked individual character over that earlier design.
- ›The appeal was dismissed; because the invalidity action succeeded on that ground, the Board did not need to examine the remaining prior designs or grounds.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- MemberH. Salmi
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0181/2025-3 | 2025-05-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |