DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 000257001-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-02-05

R0590/2024-3

Contested design: 000257001-0001

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed and the design holder is ordered to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant 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

GOR FACTORY, S.A.via PDF extraction

Spain (ES)

Ctra. de Santomera- Albanilla Km.8, 800, Nave 2, 30620 Fortuna (Murcia), Spain

Represented by

Cristina Giner Mas

Holder · RCD owner

Crocs, Inc.via PDF extraction

United States (US)

500 Eldorado Boulevard, Building 5, 80021 Broomfield, United States

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureExhibit 16

red clog shown on the Holey Soles website

www.holeysoles.com (archived at https://archive.org/web/) · Internet Archive / holeysoles.com · disclosed 2003-04-13

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 6(1)(b)Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The design holder appealed, arguing that the heel strap and side fasteners give the contested clog a different overall impression from the prior design.
  • The invalidity applicant argued that the Board should follow established case-law, treat the heel strap as insufficiently significant, and dismiss the appeal with costs.
  • The Board accepted the Internet Archive disclosure of the prior clog, identified a high degree of designer freedom for clogs, and compared the designs synthetically.
  • The Board found the shared clog shape, holes, and cutouts outweighed the strap difference, upheld the invalidity finding for lack of individual character, and dismissed the appeal.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
  • RapporteurC. Bartos
  • MemberS. Rizzo
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deGermanhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esSpanishhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frFrenchhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
itItalianhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R2274/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0093/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2273/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1575/2025-32026-04-29Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1395/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1394/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1318/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1396/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5