DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 008262364-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-02-20

R0370/2022-3

Contested design: 008262364-0001

CDRAppellant: applicantmedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed and the invalidity applicant must bear the holder's costs in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

Show verbatim operative text(it)

Il ricorso è respinto; La richiedente della nullità è condannata a sopportare le spese sostenute dalla titolare nei procedimenti di nullità e di ricorso.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Az. Agr. F.lli Buccelletti S.r.l.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Loc. Santa Lucia 149, 52043 Castiglion Fiorentino, Italia

Represented by

Alecsia Pagani

Holder · RCD owner

Sunservice S.r.l.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Località Ferretto 29, 06061 Castiglione Del Lago (PG), Italia

Represented by

Filippo Billi

Prior art cited (1)

Prior useD1⚠ rejected as evidence

plant-support pole with cylindrical body, two helices near the lower end and a cross-shaped upper terminal

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant argued that it had developed and disclosed before filing a plant-support pole with two helices and a cross-shaped top, identical to the contested RCD.
  • The holder replied that the earlier poles had evolved over time, that the applicant had used poles under the holder's technical supervision, and that the documents and declarations did not prove disclosure of the same design.
  • The Board found that the photos, contracts, declarations, invoices and later technical and WhatsApp materials could not be linked with reasonable certainty to the asserted earlier design, so disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR was not proven.
  • Because disclosure of the relied-on prior design was not established, the invalidity request failed and the appeal was dismissed with costs against the invalidity applicant.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurS. Rizzo
  • MemberC. Negro
  • Registrarp.o. R. Vidal Romero

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
frFrenchhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
itItalianoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R2322/2024-32025-05-21Decision confirmedArt 63(2), Art 7(1), Art 25(1)(b)9
R0050/2017-32021-12-09Decision annulledArt 7(1), Art 25(1)(b), Art 63(2)8
R0947/2025-32026-04-07Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b), Art 63(2)7
R0828/2024-32025-12-05Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b), Art 63(2)7
R0097/2025-32025-10-21Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b), Art 63(2)7
R0054/2025-32025-09-18Decision confirmedArt 7(1), Art 63(2)7
R2089/2024-32025-08-22Decision confirmedArt 7(1), Art 25(1)(b)7
R2328/2024-32025-08-22Decision confirmedArt 7(1), Art 25(1)(b)7