Ordine dei Consulenti in proprietà industriale
“Il disegno comunitario nell’esperienza
dell’UAMI: domande & risposte”
Giornata italiana, Milano, 09.10.2006
José J. Izquierdo, Assistant to Director,
Designs Department
Content“Il disegno comunitario: prassi e giurisprudenza”
(09.30-10.30)
General update on the Registered Community Design (RCD)ExaminationInvalidity
Decisions from the Boards of Appeal
Infringement cases on CDs
“Web services per il designo”(11.30-12.00)
RCD e-filingRCD onlineEurolocarno
Questions at any time
Il disegno comunitario: prassi e
giurisprudenza
Examination and registration operations
RCD OVERALL FIGURES
Total designs received Total designs received (until 31/08/2006)(until 31/08/2006):: 201.000201.000
Designs refused:Designs refused: 1.0001.000
Designs withdrawn:Designs withdrawn: 1.4001.400
Total designs published:Total designs published: 192.000192.000
Average designs / application:Average designs / application: 3.8 3.8
80% of designs published within:80% of designs published within: 8 weeks 8 weeks
Applications for invalidity:Applications for invalidity: 315 (0.16%) 315 (0.16%)
31,551 filed designs by IT applicants 31,551 filed designs by IT applicants (15.69%: after DE and before US)(15.69%: after DE and before US)
30,853 filed designs by IT representatives 30,853 filed designs by IT representatives (15.34%: after DE & UK)(15.34%: after DE & UK)
Most common sectors: furniture (class Most common sectors: furniture (class 06); clothing (class 02); packaging (class 06); clothing (class 02); packaging (class 09) 09)
RCD 13
RCD 21
RCD 480439
RCD 473251
RCD
Locarno Class: 99
RCD
Locarno Class: 99
CTMNice classes: 9, 16, 18,
25, 28, 38, 41
CTMNice classes: 9, 16, 18,
25, 28, 38, 41
Examination of Italian applicationsExamination of Italian applicationsExamination of Italian applicationsExamination of Italian applications
…but some tips to improve the filing and its processing
…but some tips to improve the filing and its processing
RCD 425103
RCD 122650 RCD 479399
Use e-filing or only mail; avoid fax even if urgent filing is
required (e.g. priority)
Use e-filing or only mail; avoid fax even if urgent filing is
required (e.g. priority)
Views relate to the same designViews relate to the same design
Discuss: Colour issue: “claim”; extra views for the file…Discuss: Colour issue: “claim”; extra views for the file…
“Ornamentale”“Ornamentale”
Other: plural indication; specify indication in case of multiple application
Other: plural indication; specify indication in case of multiple application
“Numero di prospettive”“Numero di prospettive”
1.11.A
1.1
1.2
“Numero di prospettive”“Numero di prospettive”
“Autore”“Autore”
“Procura”“Procura”
Invalidity
Open cases
In inter partes proceedings
ready for decision Total
Until 2005 92 9 101
2006 3 17 20
Cumulated 95 26 121
Total cases filed Settled Open Total
Until 2005 95 101 196
2006 99 20 119
Cumulated 194 121 315
OVERVIEW OF CASES
OUTCOME OF INVALIDITY CASES
Settlement of casesTotal without decision
25%
Total with decision
75%
DECISIONS TAKENApplication for
invalidity rejected39%
CD invalidated61%
NATIONALITY OF APPLICANTS
TW1%
CN4%
BS1%JP
2%KR1%US
7%
NL5%
SE4% UK
6%AT6%
DE18%
ES30%
PT2%
GROUNDS FOR INVALIDITY FREQUENCY OF CLAIMS
1
281
1
4837
70
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g)
CASES DISCUSSED UNTIL NOW
Prior Spanish Industrial Model
RCD 3595-0001
27.04.04
Decision available in:
RCD 18148-0001Prior RCD 1276-0002
03.06.04
Prior design RCD 55520-0001
02.07.04
Prior Spanish utility model RCD 3660-0001
20.07.04
RCD 5269-0001Prior Community Trade Mark 998450
03.12.04
RCD 20318-0001
Prior Spanish industrial model Prior Spanish trade marks
01.03.05
23.05.05
Prior international registration RCD 1912-0001
14.06.05
Prior German design
and international registrationRCD 107396-0001
RCD 85311-0001Prior Japanese design
20.06.05
RCD 74463-0001
Prior RCD 53186-0001
20.06.05
RCD 58334-0002
Prior Spanish trade mark
29.07.05
RCD 58334 -0001Prior Spanish trade marks
05.09.05
RCD 000294145-0001
Prior Spanish design
13.12.05
RCD 286430-0001
CTM 377580
08.02.06
Prior Spanish design (published
but refused)
RCD 000162425
01.03.06
International TM
¿Any use of a distinctive sign in a design implies its invalidity? NO
CONCLUSIONI DELL’AVVOCATO GENERALEDÁMASO RUIZ-JARABO COLOMER, C-48/05, 07.03.06
Adam Opel AGcontro
Autec AG
“L’utilizzazione per giocattoli di un segno registrato non costituisce un uso in quanto marchio ai sensi dell’art. 5, n. 1,
lett. a), della direttiva del Consiglio 21 dicembre 1988, 89/104/CEE[..] quando il produttore di un modellino giocattolo
di automobile riproduce in miniatura un autoveicolo realmente esistente, incluso il marchio del titolare di quest’ultimo apposto sull’originale, e lo immette in
commercio”
Opel Astra V8 coupe
RCD 226444
Prior design RCD 119961-0001
06.02.06
RCD 000370200-0001
29.03.06
Prior designs
RCD 352315-0007
24.08.06
Prior German TM
RCD 196167-0003
29.08.06
Prior design
RCD 000273693-0001
31.08.06
Prior Chinese design
RCD 0000171178-0005
31.08.06
Prior design
RCD 330782 -0001
12.09.06
Prior French TM
RCD 123013-0001
13.09.06
Prior UK design
Appeal
AppealsAppeals
SETTLED CASES 2004 8
IR granted 6
Decision made 2
SETTLED CASES 2005 7
IR granted 3
Decision made 2
Closed without decision 1
SETTLED CASES 2006 3
IR granted 1
Decision made 2
Closed without decision 0
COLOUR:COLOUR:
RCD 000068606-0001RCD 000068606-0001
Filed on 04/08/2003Filed on 04/08/2003
Published on Published on 23/03/200423/03/2004
Interlocutory review by Interlocutory review by DDDD
Filing date (appl. sent via Nat’l Filing date (appl. sent via Nat’l Office):Office):
RCD RCD 000110382-0001000110382-0001
Filed on Filed on 28/11/2003 28/11/2003
Published on Published on 23/03/2004 23/03/2004
R 351/2004-3: BoA did not R 351/2004-3: BoA did not endorse Examiner (21.09.04)endorse Examiner (21.09.04)
Finding: filing date must be Finding: filing date must be 20/08/200320/08/2003
COLOUR:COLOUR:
RCD RCD 000165683 000165683 -0001-0001
Filed on Filed on 26/04/2004 26/04/2004
Published on Published on 09/08/2005 09/08/2005
R 965/2004-3 :R 965/2004-3 :BoA endorsed BoA endorsed Examiner (31.03.05): 7 views: 4 Examiner (31.03.05): 7 views: 4 in blue and 3 in red – 2 in blue and 3 in red – 2 different designsdifferent designs
PRIORITY:PRIORITY:
RCD RCD 000230990000230990-0001-0001
Filed on Filed on 24/09/2004 24/09/2004
Published on Published on 11/07/2006 11/07/2006
R 784-200-3: BoA reversed R 784-200-3: BoA reversed Examiner (14.03.06): Examiner (14.03.06):
““priority from more than priority from more than one previous application one previous application can be claimed when the can be claimed when the registration of a registration of a Community design is filedCommunity design is filed””
Caselaw on CDs
http://oami.eu.int/en/design/aspects/cdcourt.htm
RCD 000016407-0001
RCD 000016407-0002
Europochette c.s. vs Vanderbiest c.s.(The Hague court, 27.10.04)
Extract from ruling: “.. the sleeping-bag design in general is not eligible for protection. Only the specific way in which it is configured is protectable … The Judge for Interim Injunctions finds that, given the designer’s limited freedom in developing a cutlery pouch, described in 3.9 – 3.11 above, the differences between Europochette on the one hand and the wide and narrow versions of NapTidi on the other hand are more than minor. Indeed, the NapTidi pouches give an informed give an informed user a different overall impression from that of Europochette.user a different overall impression from that of Europochette. ”
UCD presented in CeBit trade fair on 12.03.02
http://press.nokia.com/PR/200203/851838_5.html
UCD presented in CeBit trade fair on 12.03.02
http://press.nokia.com/PR/200203/851838_5.html
Nokia Corporation vs Jassim Waly HussinNokia Corporation vs Jassim Waly Hussin(Stockholm District court, 22.12.04)(Stockholm District court, 22.12.04)
UCDs of Starform (deposited before Dutch tax authorities in May/June 2004 and marketed since August 2004)
UCDs of Starform (deposited before Dutch tax authorities in May/June 2004 and marketed since August 2004)
Starform BV vs Time Out Holland(The Hague Court, 07.01.05)
RCDs No. 255104 by Time Out ( filed on 18.11.04; published on 08.02.05)
RCDs No. 255104 by Time Out ( filed on 18.11.04; published on 08.02.05)
RCDs by Plastimoda RCDs by Plastimoda
Plastimoda Spa vs Creaciones B’Eloni SLPlastimoda Spa vs Creaciones B’Eloni SL(AP Alicante, CTM & CD appellate court, 14.04.05)(AP Alicante, CTM & CD appellate court, 14.04.05)
Infringer’s goods Infringer’s goods UCD by PlastimodaUCD by Plastimoda
Invoked rights: CTM 91884, CTM 91835, RCDs 32438-0002, 32438-0004; 62591-0006Invoked rights: CTM 91884, CTM 91835, RCDs 32438-0002, 32438-0004; 62591-0006
BMW vs Svenska GummihusetBMW vs Svenska Gummihuset(Stockholm District court, 15.04.05)(Stockholm District court, 15.04.05)
Infringing goods as displayed in the defendant’s website (extract of judgment)Infringing goods as displayed in the defendant’s website (extract of judgment)
Festina Lotus vs Grupo Munreco SLFestina Lotus vs Grupo Munreco SL(Juzgado Alicante, CTM & CD first instance court, 20.10.05)(Juzgado Alicante, CTM & CD first instance court, 20.10.05)
RCD 330667-23; 380027-1; 380027-2; 380027-38 by Festina –Subject to Invalidityproceedings before OHIM
Infringing goods(also protected as RCDby Munreco)
Panini España SA vs Kellogg’s España SLPanini España SA vs Kellogg’s España SL(Juzgado Alicante, CTM & CD first instance court, 21.12.05)(Juzgado Alicante, CTM & CD first instance court, 21.12.05)
RCD 110648-0006 by Panini
Infringing goods
Tous SL vs Vilplasgo SLTous SL vs Vilplasgo SL(AP Alicante, CTM & CD appellate court, 01.03.06)(AP Alicante, CTM & CD appellate court, 01.03.06)
CTM 3236619 - used as ornament in TOUS handbags, disclosed as UCDs during spring-summer campaigns 2003-2004
Ornaments used by the defendant in infringing goods - Such ornaments protected as RCDs 15904-1 & 3
Web services per il disegno
RCD-ONLINE SEARCH SYSTEM
EUROLOCARNOEUROLOCARNO
GRAZIEGRAZIE
Top Related