Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-06-21
R1719/2023-3
Contested design: 004002459-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
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
Jacinto João Faria Oliveiravia PDF extraction
Portugal (PT)
Rua St. António da Fonte, n.º 1, 4740-357 Fão, Portugal
Represented by
André Pereira Branco
Holder · RCD owner
Graça & Mendes, Lda.via PDF extraction
Portugal (PT)
Lugar de Carreiro, Palmeira, 4700 Braga, Portugal
Represented by
Vera Alves
Prior art cited (1)
Screenshots of Facebook pages of user Tolniber showing a parasol (the prior design)
Facebook · disclosed 2012-04-17
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing the contested parasol resulted from later design improvements and created a different overall impression from the earlier parasol disclosures.
- ›The invalidity applicant responded that earlier parasols disclosed since 2012 already showed the same appearance and that the claimed changes were technical or barely perceptible.
- ›The Board accepted the Facebook screenshots as prior disclosure and found them clear enough to compare with the contested RCD.
- ›The Board held that the shared four-panel canopy, mast, rods, finial, ribs and handle dominated the overall impression, while shading and minor finial or curvature differences were insufficient.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the invalidity of the contested RCD for lack of individual character was maintained.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurC. Bartos
- MemberH. Salmi
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R1747/2022-3 | 2024-01-29 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0367/2022-3 | 2023-06-26 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2024/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2025/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2026/2021-3 | 2022-07-20 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R0303/2021-3 | 2022-07-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 6(1), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |