Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-09-22
R0538/2025-3
Contested design: 008866115-0002
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder's costs in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text(de)
1. Die Beschwerde wird zurückgewiesen. 2. Die Nichtigkeitsantragstellerin trägt die Kosten der Inhaberin des Unionsgeschmacksmusters im Nichtigkeits- und Beschwerdeverfahren.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
Liebscher & Bracht Schmerzfrei GmbHvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Kaiser-Friedrich-Promenade 111, 61348 Bad Homburg v.d. Höhe, Deutschland
Holder · RCD owner
AllMates GmbH & Co. KGvia PDF extraction
Germany (DE)
Otto-Hahn-Straße 20, 61381 Friedrichsdorf, Deutschland
Prior art cited (2)
older design shown in an Amazon product offering
Amazon · disclosed 2021-04-18
older design shown in an Amazon product offering
Amazon · disclosed 2021-04-18
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant appealed the rejection, arguing the contested design reproduced the overall impression of D1 and D2 and any differences were hardly perceptible.
- ›It also argued Article 25(1)(b) covered both novelty and individual character, so the first-instance body should have examined Article 6 as well.
- ›The holder asked for dismissal, maintaining that Article 5 and Article 6 are distinct grounds and relying on the reasoning in the contested decision.
- ›The Board held the invalidity request had pleaded only novelty under Article 5, and the side indentations and three-part upper structure made the contested design visibly different from D1 and D2.
- ›The appeal was therefore dismissed and costs were awarded against the invalidity applicant.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurC. Bartos
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarK. Zajfert
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish (en) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deGerman | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0536/2025-3 | 2025-09-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2063/2021-3 | 2022-07-19 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0363/2021-3 | 2022-07-19 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0051/2017-3 | 2021-12-09 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1855/2020-3 | 2021-07-02 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1856/2020-3 | 2021-06-30 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R2837/2019-3 | 2020-11-12 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1243/2017-3 | 2020-06-22 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |