Invalidity · first instance · 2018-04-27
000010537
Contested design: 002577155-0007
Outcome
The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must pay the holder's fixed costs of EUR 400.
Show verbatim operative text
1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 002577155-0007 is rejected. 2. The applicant bears the holder’s costs, fixed at EUR 400.
CostsApplicant ordered to pay costs of €400
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
MEKRA Lang GmbH & Co. KG
Germany (DE)
Buchheimer Straße 4, 91465 Ergesheim, Germany
Holder · RCD owner
Oto Numune Otomotiv Sanayi ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketivia PDF extraction
Türkiye (TR)
Nilüfer Köyü, Nilüfer Cd No:123, Osmangazi – Bursa, Turkey
Represented by
Prior art cited (3)
rear-view mirror design
German design No 402009004993-0001 · German Patent and Trade Mark Office · disclosed 2010-07-09
rear-view mirror design
German design No 402009004993-0002 · German Patent and Trade Mark Office · disclosed 2010-07-09
rear-view mirror design
International design registration No DM/073786 · WIPO Hague Express · disclosed 2010-10-31
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character and for conflict with its earlier German and international rear-view mirror designs.
- ›The holder argued the contested mirror created a different overall impression, submitted examples of similar L-shaped mirrors, and relied on a Turkish court decision upholding novelty and individual character.
- ›The Division found the prior designs were disclosed but not identical, and that visible differences in the mirror head, decoration, folding mechanism and camera gave the contested RCD a different overall impression.
- ›The Article 25(1)(d) claim failed for the same reasons, so the invalidity application was rejected in full and costs were awarded against the applicant.
Deciding panel
- MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
- MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
- MemberAlvaro SESMA MERINO
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Locarno classes
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 000010538 vs OTO NUMUNE OTOMOTIV SANAYI VE TICARET ANONIM SIRKETI | 2018-04-27 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 10 |
| 000110066 vs iAQUA (Shenzhen) Limited | 2021-05-17 | — | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 9 |
| 000110065 vs iAQUA (Shenzhen) Limited | 2021-05-17 | — | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 9 |
| 000106480 vs Scooterson Inc. | 2020-07-16 | — | Art 25(1)(d), Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 9 |
| 000113981 vs Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd | 2022-04-08 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 8 |
| 000104359 vs Lohia e-mobility GmbH | 2020-06-23 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 8 |
| 000107759 vs A & F S.r.l. | 2020-06-10 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 8 |
| 000107760 vs A & F S.r.l. | 2020-06-04 | Invalidity application rejected | Art 25(1)(b) | 12 | 8 |