DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 005835998-0001

Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2022-07-19

R2063/2021-3

Contested design: 005835998-0001

CDRAppellant: applicant

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

The appeal is dismissed, and the invalidity applicant must bear the design holder’s costs.

Show verbatim operative text

1. Dismisses the appeal; 2. Orders the invalidity applicant to bear the costs incurred by the design holder.

CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Grillfürst GmbHvia PDF extraction

Germany (DE)

Friedewalder Str. 24, 36251 Bad Hersfeld, Germany

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Yuxin E-commerce Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction

China (CN)

B1107, Block B, Zhantao Technology Building, Minzhi Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province 518000, People’s Republic of China

Prior art cited (1)

Web disclosureAnnex 1⚠ rejected as evidence

triple-head grill cleaning brush with spindle-shaped black handle

Article 17-124 / ASIN B0751T3449 · Amazon.de and alleged Grillfürst market launch · disclosed 2017-08-23

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6Article 7(1)

Argument summary

  • The invalidity applicant argued that its earlier triple-head grill brush sold under article number 17-124 and ASIN B0751T3449 had been disclosed before filing and destroyed novelty and individual character.
  • The design holder filed no defence before the Board.
  • The Board agreed with the Invalidity Division that the invoice, internal affidavits and screenshots did not objectively prove when, where and in what exact form the alleged prior brush design had been made available to the public.
  • Because disclosure under Article 7(1) CDR was not proven, the appeal was dismissed and the invalidity applicant was ordered to bear costs.

Deciding panel

  • ChairG. Humphreys
  • RapporteurC. Negro
  • MemberM. Bra
  • Registrarp.o. E. Apaolaza

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
R0538/2025-32025-09-22Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0536/2025-32025-09-22Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0363/2021-32022-07-19Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R0051/2017-32021-12-09Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1855/2020-32021-07-02Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1856/2020-32021-06-30Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R2837/2019-32020-11-12Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5
R1243/2017-32020-06-22Decision confirmedArt 25(1)(b)5