Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2026-04-14
R1817/2025-3
Contested design: 015035965-0003
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
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
ARIKA s.r.o.via PDF extraction
SK
Nižná, Slovakia
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
McLLOYD’S s.r.o.via PDF extraction
SK
Marcelová, Slovakia
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
BioSaurus animal-shaped snack shown on product packaging
https://www.letak.sk · letak.sk · disclosed 2021-07-06
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder argued that the snack shapes created a different overall impression, the designer's freedom was tightly constrained by extrusion, and the informed user should be children and parents.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that the Division correctly made a synthetic comparison, extrusion did not significantly limit design freedom, and the proper informed user was the usual informed purchaser of the registered products.
- ›The Board accepted the July 2021 letak.sk publication as sufficient disclosure, found only limited proven production constraints, and defined the informed user as a habitual purchaser of crackers, rusks, biscuits, cereal preparations and corn puffs.
- ›Because both designs shared the same animal-like silhouette and differed only in minor shaping details, the Board found no different overall impression, upheld invalidity for lack of individual character, and dismissed the appeal.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurA. Pohlmann
- MemberC. Negro
- 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 |
| 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 |
| R1395/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1396/2025-3 | 2026-04-28 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |