거절결정(디)
1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on January 23, 2017 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case No. 2016 won285 shall be revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
1. Basic facts
A. 1) Application number / Application number 1) and priority date: 30-2015-71/7151/2, Feb. 10, 2015: (a) applicant: (b) the explanation of the design and the partial design applied to the drawings multimedia terminal devices; (c) Plaintiff 3 is as follows: (d) the letter of apology and right side map expressing the entire form; (b) the Plaintiff’s design application of this case can be easily created by the patent examiner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office on December 18, 2015, on the ground that the design of this case falls under Article 33(2) of the Design Protection Act, and thus, the decision of rejection was rendered on the ground that the design of this case falls under Article 33(2) of the Design Protection Act.
2) The Plaintiff appealed and filed a trial. The Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board reviewed the design as 2016 won285, and on January 23, 2017, the pending design of this case is deemed to be a person with ordinary knowledge in the field to which the design pertains (hereinafter “ordinary designer”).
(ii) a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s request for a trial (hereinafter referred to as “instant trial ruling”) by deeming that the following prior designs 2 or 1 and 2 can be easily created from the combinations of prior designs 1 and 2.
(c) Prior designs 1) Prior Designs 1 (No. 16) and 1 (No. 16) are applied to portable information terminals published in No. 740532 of the Design Registration published on April 25, 2014, and are private roads and right pages as follows:
2) Prior designs 2 (No. 17 evidence) of the European Trademark Office (No. 2392803-002) published on January 30, 2014, as follows: 3) Prior Designs 3 (No. 18 evidence) of the Japanese Design Registration No. 1281287, which was published on September 19, 2006; 3) Aps/Dos and the right side map are as follows:
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 16 to 18, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the parties' arguments;
A. Plaintiff 1’s patent application design of this case