Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-07-08
R1590/2023-3
Contested design: 004156909-0005
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder shall bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die GGM-Inhaberin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und des Beschwerdeverfahrens.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Crocs, Inc.via PDF extraction
United States (US)
13601 Via Varra, 80020 Broomfield, Vereinigte Staaten
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
HSM Schuhmarketing GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Werksstr. 15, 45527 Hattingen, Deutschland
Represented by
Marc Barth
Prior art cited (1)
shoe (clog)
GGM Nr. 1 754 854-0001 · Blatt für Gemeinschaftsgeschmacksmuster · disclosed 2010-09-24
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder argued that designer freedom for clogs was reduced, the sector was crowded, and differences in the upper, side frame, heel strap and sole created a different overall impression.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that designer freedom in footwear remained high, market saturation was unproven, and the shared cut-out heel, perforated upper, side lines, strap and rivets dominated the overall impression.
- ›The Board admitted the additional appeal evidence, found D1 validly disclosed before the filing date, and held that the identified differences were minor details that did not alter the overall impression on the informed user.
- ›The appeal was dismissed; the contested RCD remained invalid for lack of individual character, and the holder was ordered to bear costs in both instances.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- MemberC. Bartos
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0181/2025-3 | 2025-05-27 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |