Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-04-09
R2132/2024-3
Contested design: 009184435-0002
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, the design holder must bear the invalidity and appeal costs, and those costs are fixed at EUR 1,250.
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; 3. Fixes the costs to be paid by the design holder to the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and the appeal proceedings at EUR 1 250.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €1,250
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Design4Uvia PDF extraction
Norway (NO)
Grini næringspark 12, 1361 Østerås, Norway
Holder · RCD owner
Przedsiębiorstwo Produkcyjno – Handlowo - Usługowe ‘ANDERS’ Export – Import Setla Wiesławvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Węglowa 21, 34-300 Żywiec, Poland
Represented by
Anna Bożek-Mozgała
Prior art cited (1)
RTV cabinet 'Air Med Stoffdør'
Facebook posts dated 2019-08-02 and 2020-02-09 · Facebook · disclosed 2019-08-02
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing the rear cable hole and alleged colour or texture differences were important and prevented the prior cabinet from destroying novelty.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that the earlier Air Med Stoffdør cabinet had been disclosed before filing and that the alleged differences were invisible or purely functional details.
- ›The Board accepted disclosure of the prior design from the Facebook evidence and compared the registered images with the earlier cabinet shown in Annexes A-4 and A-11.
- ›The Board found the only perceptible difference was the small hole at the back inside the cabinet, an immaterial detail under Article 5(2) CDR, so the contested RCD lacked novelty and the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurC. Bartos
- MemberA. Pohlmann
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deGerman | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esSpanish | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| itItalian | human 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2322/2024-3 | 2025-05-21 | Decision confirmed | Art 5(2), Art 25(1)(b) | — | 7 |
| R2273/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2274/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0093/2025-3 | 2026-05-18 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1575/2025-3 | 2026-04-29 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1394/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1318/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |