R1416/2024-3

• ›Applicant (Suzhou Anri) sought invalidity of contested baby stroller frame RCD 2510883-0006 on grounds of lack of novelty and individual character under Art. 25(1)(b) read with Arts. 4–6 GGV, relying on earlier Chinese design CN 201230004277.3 (published July 2012); applicant argued shared structural elements (double-rail legs, folding joint, telescopic handle, transport basket, wheels) were technically dictated and dominated both designs identically.
• ›Holder (CYBEX) denied effective disclosure of the Chinese design to EU trade circles and argued the designs produce a clearly different overall impression owing to differences in joint connector type, chassis tube angles and colours, wheel-carrier design, basket construction (opaque trapezoid vs. open mesh), and wheels (4 single with white decorative ring vs. 8 small double wheels without ring).
• ›The Board confirmed prior disclosure via the Chinese registration certificate (INID code 45, publication date 18 July 2012, predating the RCD filing of 29 July 2014); found designers enjoy wide creative freedom for baby strollers as the market shows great variety; and identified substantial differences in the central cylindrical joint nodes with connecting cross-bar (absent in prior art), cargo basket shape and material, and wheel configuration (single vs. double; size asymmetry; spoke count; decorative ring) that together produce a different overall impression on the informed user.
• ›The Board upheld the first-instance decision in full: the contested RCD possesses individual character and, a fortiori, novelty over the Chinese prior design; the appeal was dismissed and costs of both invalidity and appeal proceedings awarded to the holder.

• ChairG. Humphreys Bacon
• RapporteurC. Bartos
• MemberA. Pohlmann
• RegistrarK. Zajfert

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