Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-05-15
R2444/2020-3
Contested design: 006277935-0004
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant is ordered to bear the design holder's costs.
Show verbatim operative text(es)
Desestimar el recurso. Ordenar que la solicitante de nulidad sufrague las costas de la titular.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €900
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
COLOM BAKERY EQUIPMENT, S.L.via PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Avenida Enrique Gimeno, 100, 12006 Castellon, Espana
Represented by
Ana Otero Iglesias
Holder · RCD owner
CIBERNETICA PARA LA PANIFICACION, S.L.via PDF extraction
Spain (ES)
Camino Els Lladres, 4 y 6, 12550 Almassora (Castellon), Espana
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
earlier bread-shaping machine shown in a CP CIBERPAN catalogue emailed to a potential customer in Toronto
Mod. 93 · commercial email with attached CP CIBERPAN catalogue · disclosed 2017-03-09
earlier bread-shaping machine shown in a CIBERPAN catalogue attached to an email to a Spanish customer
Mod. 93 · commercial email with attached CIBERPAN catalogue · disclosed 2016-12-20
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested bread-shaping machine had long been marketed by the parties' businesses and relied on magazines, videos, catalogues, emails and witness statements to invoke multiple earlier machine designs, especially designs A and B.
- ›The design holder challenged the lawfulness and probative value of several emails and declarations, disputed disclosure of the alleged earlier designs, and argued that the contested machine differed materially in its base, supports and side coverings.
- ›The Board held that the appeal could only be assessed against the earlier designs properly invoked in the invalidity case, found disclosure proven for design B and assumed disclosure of design A in the applicant's favour, but concluded that both earlier machines created a different overall impression from the contested RCD.
- ›Because the contested design retained individual character, the Board dismissed the appeal and ordered the invalidity applicant to pay the holder's fixed representation costs for both instances.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurS. Rizzo
- MemberH. Salmi
- Registrarp.o. E. Apaolaza Alm
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| itItalian | human 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0861/2023-3 | 2024-02-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 63(1) | — | 7 |
| R0862/2023-3 | 2024-02-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 63(1) | — | 7 |
| R1698/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |
| R1696/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |
| R1699/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |
| R1654/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |
| R1695/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |
| R1694/2021-3 | 2022-08-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 52(2) | — | 7 |