62018TJ0560_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 24 October 2019 –Atos Medical v EUIPO — Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb (medical plasters)
(Case T‑560/18)
(Community design — Invalidity proceedings — Registered Community design representing a medical plaster — Disclosure of the earlier designs — Ground for invalidity — Individual character — Informed user — Degree of freedom of the designer — Different overall impression — Article 6 and Article 25(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002)
1.
Community designs — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Re-evaluation of the facts in the light of evidence produced for the first time before it — Precluded
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 61)
(see para. 18)
2.
Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Previous disclosure of identical design — Proof of the disclosure
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6 and 65(1); Commission Regulation No 2245/2002, Art. 28(1)(b)(v) and (vi))
(see paras 27, 28)
3.
Community designs — Conditions for protection — Individual character — Design giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Determination of the overall impression in relation to one or more prior designs, taken individually
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Art. 6)
(see para. 35)
4.
Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Criteria for assessment — Creative licence
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(2) and 25(1)(b))
(see paras 46, 47)
5.
Community designs — Ground for invalidity — Conflict with an earlier design — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Informed user — Meaning
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1), 10(1) and 25(1)(b))
(see paras 50, 51, 59)
6.
Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Global assessment of all the elements of the prior design
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6(1) and 25(1)(b))
(see paras 57, 58)
7.
Community designs — Ground for invalidity — No individual character — Design not giving the informed user a different overall impression from that produced by the earlier design — Representation of a medical plaster
(Council Regulation No 6/2002, Arts 6 and 25(1)(b))
(see paras 65, 67, 69, 70)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 June 2018 (Case R 2216/2016-3), relating to invalidity proceedings between Atos Medical and Andreas Fahl Medizintechnik-Vertrieb.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Atos Medical GmbH to pay the costs.