Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-03-13
R0370/2022-3
Contested design: 008262364-0001
Outcome
The contested decision is annulled, Community design No 8 262 364-0001 is declared invalid, and the design holder is ordered to bear the fees and costs incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(it)
1. La decisione impugnata è annullata e il modello comunitario n. 8 262 364-0001 è dichiarato nullo. 2. Al titolare del disegno viene ordinato di sopportare le spese e le tasse sostenute dalla richiedente la nullità nei procedimenti di nullità e di ricorso.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Az. Agr. F.lli Buccelletti S.r.l.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Loc. Santa Lucia 149, 52043 Castiglion Fiorentino, Italia
Represented by
Alecsia Pagani
Holder · RCD owner
Sunservice S.r.l.via PDF extraction
Italy (IT)
Località Ferretto 29, 06061 Castiglione Del Lago (PG), Italia
Represented by
Susanna Lombardo
Prior art cited (1)
plant-support pole with two lower helices and a cross-shaped upper end
open-air agricultural sites and publicly visible transport · disclosed 2017-06-07
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant appealed, arguing that its documentary, witness and forensic evidence proved public disclosure of an earlier plant-support pole before the filing date and that the contested RCD lacked novelty and individual character.
- ›The holder replied that the evidence did not reliably show the same pole, that the product had evolved over time, and that any earlier use by the applicant had been authorised by the holder.
- ›After the General Court annulled the prior Board decision, the Board treated disclosure of the earlier design under Article 7(1) CDR as established and reassessed individual character under Article 6(1)(b) CDR.
- ›The Board found that the shared steel pole, needle-like tip, two lower helices, and cross-slotted upper end dominated the overall impression, while the helix position and squarer top were insufficient to differentiate the designs.
- ›The appeal was upheld, the first-instance rejection was annulled, the contested RCD was declared invalid, and costs were awarded against the holder.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurA. González Fernández
- MemberA. Pohlmann
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| itItalian | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0370/2022-3 | 2025-04-01 | Other | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(2), Art 61(6) | — | 8 |
| R1858/2022-3 | 2024-11-08 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(2) | — | 6 |
| R1857/2022-3 | 2024-11-08 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 6(2) | — | 6 |
| R1524/2021-3 | 2022-05-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 61(6) | — | 6 |
| R0595/2020-3 | 2020-10-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b), Art 61(6) | — | 6 |
| R0577/2025-3 | 2026-01-21 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1804/2024-3 | 2025-11-19 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0922/2024-3 | 2025-07-08 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |