Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-04-25
R1397/2021-3
Contested design: 003315571-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Heco Nordiska Aktiebolagvia PDF extraction
Sweden (SE)
Rocknevägen 16, 33573 Hillerstorp, Sweden
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Troldtekt A/Svia PDF extraction
Denmark (DK)
Sletvej 2A, 8310 Tranbjerg J., Denmark
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
Earlier screw design with branching pattern on the screw head
Ejot DDS screw · Ejot product catalogue 'ETICS Anchors' · disclosed 2011-06-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, denying sufficient prior disclosure of the Ejot DDS screw and arguing that differences in the screw-head pattern, materials and colour gave the contested screw an individual overall impression.
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the head pattern was the decisive visible feature and that the earlier DDS screw had been disclosed well before the contested filing date through catalogues and other product material.
- ›The Board accepted the disclosure evidence and held that the screw heads shared the same characteristic branching line pattern, while the remaining differences were too minor to alter the overall impression for the informed user.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the invalidation of the contested screw design was confirmed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- MemberE. Fink
- Registrarp.o. R. 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2422/2022-3 | 2024-01-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1562/2022-3 | 2023-05-31 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1103/2022-3 | 2023-02-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1289/2021-3 | 2022-10-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1290/2021-3 | 2022-10-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0055/2022-3 | 2022-10-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0303/2021-3 | 2022-07-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1357/2021-3 | 2022-06-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |