DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004124642-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-04-15

R1928/2023-3

Contested design: 004124642-0001

CDRAppellant: holdermedium-confidence extraction

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder is ordered to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.

Show verbatim operative text(it)

1. Respinge il ricorso. 2. Ordina alla titolare del disegno o modello di sopportare le spese e le tasse sostenute dalla richiedente la nullità nei procedimenti di nullità e di ricorso.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Castello S.r.l.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Via Sammichele, 30, 70010, Turi (BA), Italia

Represented by

TMSHELL

Holder · RCD owner

Società generale delle Acque minerali S.p.A.via PDF extraction

Italy (IT)

Via Salandra 1/A, 00187 Roma, Italia

Prior art cited (1)

Registered RCD

bottles

RCD No 002648576-0001 · Community Designs Bulletin

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The holder-appellant argued that the Division underestimated crowding in the water-bottle sector, so the informed user would notice the contested design’s ring, ribbing, and waist differences from the earlier design.
  • The invalidity applicant replied that market crowding had neither been properly pleaded nor proved, and that the expert opinion and Corsearch material did not establish a coherent, dated prior-art corpus.
  • The Board held that designer freedom for water bottles is broad, that any alleged crowding of the state of the art was unproven, and that the cited materials did not show a dense pre-filing design corpus.
  • Comparing the earlier RCD 002648576-0001 with the contested RCD, the Board found the same overall impression; minor differences in the number of rings, ribs, and base details were insufficient, so the appeal was dismissed.

Deciding panel

  • ChairS. Stürmann
  • RapporteurC. Negro
  • MemberS. Rizzo
  • RegistrarE. Wagner

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglish (en)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)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
R0947/2025-32026-04-07Decision confirmedArt 4(1), Art 25(1)(a)5
R2028/2023-32024-04-15Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(a), Art 4(1)5
R2422/2022-32024-01-30Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5
R1747/2022-32024-01-29Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5
R1103/2022-32023-02-15Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5
R0133/2022-32022-12-07Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5
R2206/2021-32022-12-07Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5
R2054/2021-32022-08-19Decision confirmedArt 4(1)5