DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 015013606-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2026-02-19

R0898/2025-3

Contested design: 015013606-0001

CDRAppellant: holder

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

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

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

Portas Arcuense - Fábrica de Portas Seccionadasvia PDF extraction

Portugal (PT)

Parque Industrial de Padreiro, Lote 13, 4970-500 Arcos de Valdevez, Portugal

Represented by

Joana Jorge Cerqueira

Holder · RCD owner

MOTORLINE ELECTROCELOS, S.A.via PDF extraction

Portugal (PT)

Travessa do Sobreiro, n.º 29, Lugar do Pinheiro, 4755-474 Barcelos, Portugal

Represented by

PATENTREE

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureAnnex 2A

Amazon offer showing a control board

ASIN B06XD5GZ69 · Amazon.es · disclosed 2017-03-02

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The design holder argued the Amazon evidence was partly unclear, the informed user was a trained electrical professional, design freedom was constrained, and several feature differences created a different overall impression.
  • The invalidity applicant filed no reply in the appeal and relied on its earlier position that the contested design matched the prior Amazon-disclosed control board in all essential respects.
  • The Board accepted Annex 2A as a public disclosure from 2 March 2017, found only limited design freedom, and treated the informed user as attentive but not a technical expert.
  • The Board held that the shared board layout, component shapes, and arrangement dominated the minor differences, so the contested design lacked individual character over the prior design.
  • The appeal was dismissed, reimbursement of the appeal fee was refused, and the design holder was ordered to bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
  • RapporteurH. Salmi
  • MemberA. Pohlmann
  • RegistrarK. Zajfert

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)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
R2274/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0093/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2273/2025-32026-05-18Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1575/2025-32026-04-29Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1395/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1394/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1318/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1396/2025-32026-04-28Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5