However, the General Court accepted Gifi's argument that the Board failed to examine all the evidence it had produced, and the Board's judgment did not mention several of the designs cited: «
In the present case, it is clear that, in the light of the Board of Appeal's assertion that it was required to re-examine the application for a declaration of invalidity in its entirety, followed by a one - by - one examination of the contested design in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.&raqu
In the present case, it is clear that,
in the light of the Board of Appeal's assertion that it was required to re-examine the application for a declaration of invalidity in its entirety, followed by a one - by - one examination of the contested design in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.&raqu
in the light of the Board of Appeal's assertion that it was required to re-examine the
application for a declaration of invalidity
in its entirety, followed by a one - by - one examination of the contested design in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.&raqu
in its
entirety, followed by a one - by - one examination of the contested design
in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.&raqu
in relation only to Designs D 1 to D 17, it is impossible to infer from the wording of the contested decision, or the context
in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into account Designs D 18 to D 22.&raqu
in which it appears, what is the implied reasoning justifying the failure to take into
account Designs D 18 to D 22.»