Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-06-25
R1745/2023-3
Contested design: 008919880-0001
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder's costs in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the invalidity applicant to bear the costs incurred by the design holder in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Antibiotice SAvia PDF extraction
Romania (RO)
1, Valea Lupului Street, 707410 Iasi, Romania
Represented by
Ionut Parpauta
Holder · RCD owner
Zdrovit Romania SRLvia PDF extraction
Romania (RO)
Str. Sevastopol, Nr. 13-17, Sector 1, Bucuresti, Romania
Represented by
Elena Grecu
Prior art cited (2)
Fluxiv packaging shown in Romanian health-authority paperwork, invoices, 2021 advertising schedules and YouTube material
Fluxiv packaging disclosure materials · Romanian National Institute of Public Health paperwork, invoices, broadcasting schedules and YouTube
Fluxiv figurative trade mark used as the earlier package-front design
Romanian figurative trade mark No M 2021 01424 · Official Bulletin of Industrial Property, Romania / registration certificate · disclosed 2021-03-02
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant argued that the contested medical-product packaging lacked novelty and individual character over its earlier Fluxiv packaging, stressing the shared red-white layout and female-leg imagery.
- ›The design holder replied that only the Romanian bulletin publication was proven, the remaining disclosure evidence was unsupported, and the contested packaging differed in graphics, geometry, wording and colour shades.
- ›The Board agreed that the Romanian trade mark publication of 2 March 2021 was a valid prior disclosure, but the other annexes and YouTube material were insufficient to prove an additional obstacle.
- ›It found the informed user would notice clear differences in the leg depiction, proportions, geometric shapes, wording, colour placement and extra views of the contested RCD.
- ›The appeal was dismissed because the contested RCD retained individual character, and the invalidity applicant was ordered to bear costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0116/2025-3 | 2025-07-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0115/2025-3 | 2025-07-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1669/2023-3 | 2024-11-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2453/2023-3 | 2024-10-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0952/2021-3 | 2024-09-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2140/2023-3 | 2024-08-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2585/2023-3 | 2024-08-06 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0494/2023-3 | 2024-03-19 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |