Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-06-23
R1157/2024-3
Contested design: 002249763-0083
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
Dismisses the appeal. 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
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
Represented by
Kostadin Manev
Prior art cited (1)
Vesta Logistics EOOD promotional brochure showing an 'MDF DOOR'
Vesta Logistics EOOD brochure · disclosed 2010-05-03
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, seeking suspension because of parallel Sofia court proceedings and arguing the brochure was unreliable, possibly fabricated, and insufficient to prove prior disclosure.
- ›The invalidity applicant opposed suspension because the national court had stayed its case in favour of EUIPO and argued the dated third-party brochure proved public disclosure before filing.
- ›The Board continued the appeal because the Sofia courts finally stayed the national case and limited review to disclosure, as the individual-character findings were not challenged on appeal.
- ›The Board held the professionally formatted third-party brochure sufficiently proved disclosure under Article 7(1); the prior design destroyed individual character, so the appeal was dismissed with costs.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1156/2024-3 | 2025-06-23 | Decision confirmed | Art 63(1), Art 91(2) | — | 7 |
| R1158/2024-3 | 2025-06-23 | Decision confirmed | Art 63(1), Art 91(2) | — | 7 |
| R0105/2025-3 | 2025-10-31 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 63(1) | — | 4 |
| R2491/2020-3 | 2024-11-26 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 91(2) | — | 4 |
| R2493/2020-3 | 2024-11-26 | Remitted (further prosecution) | Art 91(2) | — | 4 |
| R0469/2024-3 | 2024-09-16 | Closed without deciding on the merits | Art 91(2) | — | 4 |
| R1398/2017-3 | 2019-03-20 | Case suspended | Art 91(2) | — | 4 |
| R0862/2023-3 | 2024-02-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 63(1) | — | 3 |