Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2025-05-27
R0181/2025-3
Contested design: 015025412-0004
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed and the design holder is ordered to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal. 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by the invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
NINGBO UCOME LIGHTING CO., LTD.via PDF extraction
China (CN)
No. 3, Shaojiadu, Zhushan Village, Lizhou Street, Yuyao City, Ningbo, 315400 Zhejiang, China
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
Yuyao Vchalux Electric Co., Ltdvia PDF extraction
China (CN)
No. 99 Zhushan Economic Zone, Lizhou Street, Yuyao, 315400 Ningbo, Zhejiang, China
Represented by
Prior art cited (1)
table lamps
REUD No 15 007 349-0001 · eSearch database; European Union Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2023-01-05
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The design holder appealed, arguing the contested table-lamp design had individual character because differences in the base, underside charging point, pole, lampshade proportions, and colour contrast changed the overall impression.
- ›The invalidity applicant replied that designer freedom for cordless table lamps is broad and the identified differences, especially on the underside and in colour, were minor beside the shared overall form.
- ›The Board treated the product as cordless table lamps, found the informed user relatively attentive, and held design freedom remained wide despite functional constraints.
- ›The Board found both designs shared the same circular base, thin elongated stem, and conical cap, so the differences were insufficient to alter the overall impression; the appeal was dismissed.
Deciding panel
- ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberC. Bartos
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| frfrançais (fr) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R0827/2024-3 | 2025-03-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1336/2024-3 | 2025-03-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0797/2024-3 | 2025-01-16 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1123/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1125/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1124/2021-3 | 2024-12-10 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R1015/2024-3 | 2024-11-07 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |
| R0252/2024-3 | 2024-11-05 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(b) | — | 5 |