Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-08-14
R2140/2023-3
Contested design: 003143957-0041
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the costs of the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Nichtigkeitsantragstellerin trägt die Kosten des Nichtigkeits- und Beschwerdeverfahrens.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Kaufhaus Martin Stolz GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Am Markt 2-6, 23769 Fehmarn OT Burg, Deutschland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Naketano GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Alfredstraße 57-65, 45130 Essen, Deutschland
Prior art cited (5)
Modell "Schwarzkopf"
Klageschrift der GGM-Inhaberin (Az. 14c O 14/22) · disclosed 2015-07-21
Modell "Blonder Engel"
Klageschrift der GGM-Inhaberin (Az. 14c O 14/22) · disclosed 2015-07-21
Modell "Gigi Meroni"
Klageschrift und Urteile; eBay-Angebote · disclosed 2015-01-14
Modell "Brazzo"
Klageschrift der GGM-Inhaberin und Urteil des Landgerichts München (Az. 1 HK O 7001/17) · disclosed 2013-02-04
Modell "Monsterbumserin"
Wayback Machine und Urteil des Landgerichts München · disclosed 2013-07-15
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant appealed, arguing that earlier hoodie designs D3 to D5 created the same overall impression and that the Office overstated minor differences.
- ›The holder replied that the appeal did not engage with the first-instance reasoning and that even combinations of known features can still produce a distinct overall impression.
- ›The Board held D1 and D2 were excluded by the Article 7(2) grace period, while D3 to D5 were disclosed but differed in cut, emblem, pockets, and rear details.
- ›The Board found the contested design had individual character and novelty over D3 to D5, so the appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the invalidity applicant.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- MemberC. Bartos
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish (en) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| R2585/2023-3 | 2024-08-06 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1745/2023-3 | 2024-06-25 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0494/2023-3 | 2024-03-19 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |