DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006611570-0002

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-08-08

R0952/2021-3

Contested design: 006611570-0002

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Other

The appeal proceedings are suspended until the General Court gives a final judgment in Case T-377/22.

Show verbatim operative text(es)

Suspender el procedimiento de recurso hasta que el Tribunal General de la Unión Europea haya dictado su sentencia en el asunto T-377/22 y dicha sentencia sea firme.

CostsNot specified

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

CAYAGO TEC GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Benzstraße 10, 32108 Bad Salzuflen, Alemania

Represented by

Jordi Güell Serra

Holder · RCD owner

iAQUA (Shenzhen) Limitedvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

n.º 6 Building Huayisheng Industrial Park, n.º 4 industrial Zone, Fenghuang, Fuyong, Shenzhen, República Popular De China

Prior art cited (4)

Registered RCDD1

sports apparatus / underwater motive device design

RCD No 2 077 206-0004 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2012-09-10

Registered RCDD2

sports apparatus / underwater motive device design

RCD No 2 077 206-0003 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2012-09-10

Registered RCDD3

sports apparatus / underwater motive device design

RCD No 2 077 206-0002 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2012-09-10

Registered RCDD4

sports apparatus / underwater motive device design

RCD No 2 077 206-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2012-09-10

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 25(1)(d)Article 4(1)Article 6Article 7(1)Article 108Article 71(1)(a)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant appealed the rejection of its invalidity application against the contested watercraft design, relying on earlier Community designs D1 to D4 and lack of individual character.
  • The design holder defended the first-instance dismissal and argued that the contested design still produced a different overall impression.
  • The Board observed that a parallel appeal between the same parties concerning RCD No 6 611 570-0001 had already been challenged before the General Court in Case T-377/22 and raised essentially the same factual and legal questions.
  • To avoid inconsistent outcomes, the Board suspended the present appeal until the General Court’s judgment in T-377/22 becomes final.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurS. Rizzo
  • MemberH. Salmi
  • Registrarp.o. E. Apaolaza

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗