Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2024-09-16
R0470/2024-3
Contested design: 003119601-0010
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed as inadmissible, and the design holder must bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal as inadmissible; 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs incurred by the invalidity applicant.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
ТОП ТЕНvia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
ul. Zhelezarska no. 9, 4000 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Represented by
Stoyan Sirakov
Holder · RCD owner
DOORS BULGARIA EOODvia PDF extraction
Bulgaria (BG)
j.k. "Pobeda", bl. 9, floor 2, app. 10, 9000 Varna, Bulgaria
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed the invalidity decision, arguing that it had not received the contested decision because its usual lawyer was not recorded for the design, so the four-month period for filing grounds should run only from 29 February 2024.
- ›The invalidity applicant filed no observations in the appeal; the case turned on the Registry's deficiency notice and the holder's reply about late awareness of the decision.
- ›The Board held that notification occurred through the holder's EUIPO inbox on 9 January 2024, so the grounds of appeal were due by 10 May 2024; filing them on 27 May 2024 made the appeal inadmissible under Article 57 CDR and Article 35(1) CDIR.
- ›The appeal was dismissed as inadmissible and the design holder was ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's appeal costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- MemberC. Negro
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0469/2024-3 | 2024-09-16 | Closed without deciding on the merits | Art 35(1) | — | 5 |
| R1101/2024-3 | 2024-11-13 | Closed without deciding on the merits | Art 35(1) | — | 3 |
| R2384/2023-3 | 2024-01-24 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |
| R1172/2022-3 | 2022-12-02 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |
| R1171/2022-3 | 2022-11-30 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |
| R2022/2021-3 | 2022-06-21 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |
| R0365/2021-3 | 2021-06-22 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |
| R0658/2020-3 | 2020-08-24 | Appeal inadmissible | Art 35(1) | — | 2 |