Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-06-10
R2167/2023-3
Contested design: 015001310-0001
Outcome
The contested decision is annulled, the case is remitted to the Invalidity Division for further prosecution of the invalidity request, and each party bears its own appeal costs.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Annuls the contested decision; 2. Remits the case to the Invalidity Division for further prosecution of the request for a declaration of invalidity; 3. Orders each party to bear its own costs in the appeal proceedings.
CostsEach party bears its own costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Pchela - 97 Ltd.via PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
12, Tsar Ivan Asen II Str., 1000 Sofia, Bulgaria
Represented by
Maria Nikolaeva Vladimirova
Holder · RCD owner
Hristo Shiderovvia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
z.k. Mladost 3, bl. 326, entry 4, ap. 17, 1712 Sofia, Bulgaria
Prior art cited (13)
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-10-22
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-10-30
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-10-30
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-11-30
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-12-01
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2020-12-01
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2021-03-10
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2021-04-22
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2021-05-18
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2021-06-02
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2021-11-01
chocolate product image
Facebook page "KAKAO" · disclosed 2022-01-12
chocolate product image
Chocogram Facebook profile · disclosed 2020-08-01
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant appealed, arguing the Division wrongly discounted the screenshots and should have allowed any translation defect to be remedied.
- ›The holder argued the applicant had not proved lack of novelty and that the appeal relied on images and products that did not properly match the contested design.
- ›The Board accepted supplementary appeal evidence for the already identified D1-D13 designs and found the Facebook extracts sufficiently proved their disclosure before the filing date.
- ›Because the Division had not yet examined novelty and individual character on the merits, the Board annulled the decision and remitted the case for further prosecution.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurS. Rizzo
- MemberC. Negro
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1924/2019-3 | 2020-05-07 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1), Art 60(1) | — | 7 |
| R2427/2023-3 | 2024-07-31 | Decision partially annulled | Art 7(1), Art 60(1) | — | 6 |
| R0055/2022-3 | 2022-10-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 7(1), Art 60(1) | — | 6 |
| R2443/2020-3 | 2023-01-17 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1) | — | 5 |
| R0068/2022-3 | 2023-01-09 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1) | — | 5 |
| R0093/2022-3 | 2022-10-25 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1) | — | 5 |
| R0092/2022-3 | 2022-10-25 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1) | — | 5 |
| R0811/2021-3 | 2021-10-26 | Decision annulled | Art 7(1) | — | 5 |