DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 006412573-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-06-07

R2030/2022-3

Contested design: 006412573-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal upheld (reversal)

The contested decision is annulled, the challenged design is declared invalid, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Annuls the contested decision and declares Community design No 6 412 573-0001 invalid; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Mafi ABvia PDF extraction

Sweden (SE)

Seljavägen 15, 792 95 MORA, Sweden

Represented by

Zacco Sweden AB

Holder · RCD owner

SRK Tele Energy India Private Limitedvia PDF extraction

IN

Unit No. 609, Tower C, Unitech Business Zone Sector 50, Gurgaon Haryana 122 018, India

Represented by

Landmark B.V.

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD

fastening device

5 302 924-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2018-06-13

Prior use

examples of fastening devices for attaching telecom transmitters available on the market

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant appealed the first-instance rejection, arguing the contested mounting-device design was effectively identical to the prior RCD apart from minor finishing differences.
  • The design holder filed no response in the appeal proceedings.
  • The Board held that the shared recessed body, elevated wings, perpendicular elevations, and hole layout dominated the informed user's perception, while the edge angles, openings, and colour differences were minor.
  • It annulled the rejection decision, declared the contested RCD invalid for lack of individual character, and awarded costs against the design holder.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurH. Salmi
  • MemberC. Negro
  • RegistrarE. Apaolaza Alm

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R2504/2022-32023-06-28Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2417/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2415/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2416/2018-32023-03-01Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R2443/2020-32023-01-17Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R0068/2022-32023-01-09Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R0093/2022-32022-10-25Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5
R0092/2022-32022-10-25Decision annulledArt 25(1)(b)5