DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002647040-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-09-05

R1800/2021-3

Contested design: 002647040-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the costs incurred by the design holder.

Show verbatim operative text(fr)

1. Le recours est rejeté ; 2. Condamne la demanderesse en nullité à supporter les frais exposés par la titulaire du dessin ou modèle.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Grassy Handels GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

L.-F. Schönherr-Straße 32, 08523 Plauen, Allemagne

Holder · RCD owner

ID PLUS S.A.via PDF extraction

Belgium (BE)

Horzelstraat 100, 1180 Brussel, Belgique

Represented by

Cabinet Bede S.A.

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(a)Article 3(a)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant argued that the contested RCD did not satisfy the definition of a design because its seven views allegedly showed contradictory products rather than one coherent product part.
  • The design holder replied that the views depicted the same sleeping-bag foot section in closed and open positions, with dotted lines used only for contextual elements outside the claimed design.
  • The Board held that the deposited views were coherent, sufficiently precise and clear enough to determine the scope of protection, so the design met Article 3(a) CDR.
  • The contested decision rejecting the invalidity application was confirmed and the appeal was dismissed.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurM. Bra
  • MemberS. Rizzo
  • 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
R2028/2023-32024-04-15Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R0573/2022-32023-01-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R0574/2022-32023-01-10Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R1956/2020-32022-11-14Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R1101/2020-32022-11-03Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R2060/2019-32022-02-01Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R1140/2019-32020-04-07Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5
R0026/2019-32020-02-26Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a)5