logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 특허법원 2019.12.20 2019허4031
등록무효(디)
Text

1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on April 22, 2019 on the case No. 2018DaDa2031 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

(a) The Defendant’s registered design 1) filing date/registration date/registration number: A product subject to design C/D/E 2: A description of the three design of gas soil, the main points of creation, and drawings: as shown in attached Form 1;

(b) 11) Date of application/registration date/registration number/public announcement date: Items subject to design on February 7, 201/201, 680711/2 February 14, 2013: 3 design of portable gastop three design, main points of creation, and drawings: Attached Form 2;

C. On July 3, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a petition with the Defendant for a trial to invalidate design registration (2018Da2031), and the registered design is similar to prior design 1, etc. and is wholly amended by Act No. 11848, May 28, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply).

Article 5(1)3 applies to a person who has ordinary knowledge in the field to which the design pertains (hereinafter referred to as “ordinary designer”).

(2) On April 22, 2019, the Korean Intellectual Property Tribunal rendered a ruling to reject the Plaintiff’s above request for a trial (hereinafter “instant ruling”) on the ground that a design that can be easily created from prior designs 1, etc. falls under Article 5(2) of the former Design Protection Act, and thus, the design registration should be invalidated.

【Ground for recognition】An absence of dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the illegality of the trial decision of this case

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff’s ground for invalidation of the Plaintiff’s registered design should be revoked on the ground that the instant trial decision, which concluded otherwise, is unlawful, despite the following grounds for invalidation.

1) The registered design is similar to the prior design 1, and there exists grounds for invalidation falling under Article 5(1)3 of the former Design Protection Act. 2) The registered design also consists of prior design 1, or a type that is widely known as prior design 1.

arrow