Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-10-26
R1289/2021-3
Contested design: 003069616-0008
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs.
Show verbatim operative text(es)
1. Desestimar el recurso. 2. Ordenar que la titular sufrague las costas de la solicitante de nulidad.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Soluciones de Iluminación LED, S.L.via PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
C. Sant Joan de la Salle (Ed Technova), n.º 42, 3º, 08022 Barcelona, España
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Vibia Lighting, S.L.U.via PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
C. Progrés, 4, 08850 Gavà, España
Represented by
Prior art cited (3)
Algorithm lamp collection article
https://www.archiproducts.com/en/news/algorithm-vibia-presents-new-collection-designed-by-toan-nguyen_45128 · Archiproducts · disclosed 2015-04-13
Algorithm lamp collection article
https://www.archiportale.com/news/2015/04/archiproducts-news/globi-luminosi-sospesi-disciplinati-secondo-un-ordine-matematico_45128_65.html · Archiportale · disclosed 2015-04-13
Algorithm lamp collection news page
http://toan-nguyen.com/news/algorithm-and-contemporary-collection-featured-at-euroluce-and-salone-del-mobile/ · Toan Nguyen website · disclosed 2015-04-13
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder argued that the online disclosures of the Algorithm lamp collection were not reliably proven to predate filing and that any disclosure should fall within the Article 7(2) grace period.
- ›The invalidity applicant relied on three online publications dated 13 April 2015, together with a notarial record and expert report, to show disclosure before the grace period cut-off.
- ›The Board found the combined internet, notarial and expert evidence sufficient to prove disclosure on 13 April 2015 and agreed with the Invalidity Division that the contested lamp design lacked novelty over the earlier disclosure.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the holder was ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurS. Rizzo
- MemberH. Salmi
- Registrarp.o. E. Apaolaza Alm
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esSpanish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1562/2022-3 | 2023-05-31 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 9 |
| R1290/2021-3 | 2022-10-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 9 |
| R0055/2022-3 | 2022-10-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 9 |
| R1288/2021-3 | 2022-06-02 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 9 |
| R2422/2022-3 | 2024-01-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2336/2022-3 | 2023-11-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 7 |
| R0542/2022-3 | 2023-04-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 7(2) | — | 7 |
| R1103/2022-3 | 2023-02-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |