DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 002370700-0073

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-06-23

R1158/2024-3

Contested design: 002370700-0073

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must 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

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)

Web disclosure

door shown on archived webpage

http://sdelalremont.ru/kak-vybrat-mezhkomnatnuyu-dver-pravilno.html (Internet Archive capture) · Internet Archive / Wayback Machine · disclosed 2013-08-23

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The design holder appealed and sought suspension, arguing a Sofia court counterclaim preceded the EUIPO case and that the Wayback Machine material was unreliable and uncertified.
  • The invalidity applicant opposed suspension, said the national counterclaim was not effectively pending first, and maintained the archived webpage clearly proved pre-filing disclosure of the prior door design.
  • The Board refused suspension because the Sofia City Court had stayed its proceedings in favour of the Office and that ruling had become final.
  • The Board held the Internet Archive screenshot and webpage printout sufficiently proved public disclosure on 23 August 2013; abstract manipulation concerns and generic archive disclaimers did not undermine their probative value.
  • The prior design destroyed the contested REUD's individual character, so the appeal was dismissed and the design holder was ordered to bear costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
  • RapporteurA. Pohlmann
  • MemberC. Negro
  • RegistrarH. Dijkema

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
frFrenchhuman translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine 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
R1157/2024-32025-06-23Decision confirmedArt 63(1), Art 91(2)7
R1156/2024-32025-06-23Decision confirmedArt 63(1), Art 91(2)7
R0105/2025-32025-10-31Remitted (further prosecution)Art 63(1)4
R2491/2020-32024-11-26Remitted (further prosecution)Art 91(2)4
R2493/2020-32024-11-26Remitted (further prosecution)Art 91(2)4
R0469/2024-32024-09-16Closed without deciding on the meritsArt 91(2)4
R1398/2017-32019-03-20Case suspendedArt 91(2)4
R0862/2023-32024-02-28Decision confirmedArt 63(1)3