Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-10-01
R1856/2024-3
Contested design: 004541712-0016
Outcome
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
GOTSZLIK Spółka z ograniczoną odpowiedzialnościąvia PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
Glinki 27A, 63200 Jarocin, Poland
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
IKOONA SP. Z O.O.via PDF extraction
Poland (PL)
ul. Marsz. Józefa Piłsudskiego 74/230, 50020 WROCŁAW, Poland
Represented by
Aleksandra Kacperska
Prior art cited (2)
rainbow-coloured ice cream wafer cone
Tikkido.com article 'Watercolour Painted Rainbow Ice Cream Cones Tutorial' · Tikkido.com · disclosed 2016-06-22
rainbow-coloured ice cream wafer cone
Tikkido Instagram post · Instagram · disclosed 2016-06-23
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing the Tikkido cone was not a protectable design, was not fully shown, was not properly disclosed to specialised circles, and in any event created a different overall impression.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that the Tikkido cone was a finished prior design publicly disclosed on globally accessible online platforms and that both cornets produced the same overall impression.
- ›The Board admitted the additional appeal evidence but held that the Tikkido website and Instagram post were separate disclosure events, the prior cone qualified as a design, and the disclosure exception was not rebutted.
- ›Given the high degree of design freedom and the shared rainbow horizontal-segment decoration on an inverted cone, the contested design lacked individual character; the appeal was dismissed and costs were awarded against the holder.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurH. Salmi
- MemberE. Fink
- RegistrarK. Zajfert
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| R2273/2025-3 | 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 |
| R1396/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |