Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-06-16
R0082/2023-3
Contested design: 006634945-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees in both instances.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal. 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
Beurer GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Söflinger Str. 218, 89077 Ulm, Germany
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Foreo Abvia PDF extraction
Sweden (SE)
Karlavägen 41, 11434 Stockholm, Sweden
Represented by
Prior art cited (2)
cosmetic device / facial cleanser
2 211 086-0002 · Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2013-04-10
skin cleanser
PCT/IB2014/000530 · international patent publication · disclosed 2014-07-10
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder argued that publication of the earlier FOREO design did not prove relevant disclosure and that the contested round cleansing device differed in bristle layout, asymmetry, thickness, width, and button placement.
- ›The invalidity applicant did not file a timely response in the appeal proceedings.
- ›The Board held that Bulletin publication was sufficient disclosure and that the round shape, upper bristle or nub coverage, flat base, charging port, and FOREO branding created the same overall impression despite minor differences in density, width, and button position.
- ›It confirmed lack of individual character, found no need to examine the remaining grounds, and dismissed the design holder's appeal.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys
- RapporteurM. Bra
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarE. Apaolaza Alm
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R1719/2023-3 | 2024-06-21 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R1747/2022-3 | 2024-01-29 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R0367/2022-3 | 2023-06-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R0081/2023-3 | 2023-06-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R2025/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |
| R2026/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1) | — | 5 |