DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 003002286-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-06-22

000010430

Contested design: 003002286-0001

CDR

Outcome

Invalidated (total)

The invalidity application is upheld; Registered Community design No 003002286-0001 is declared invalid; the holder must bear the applicant's costs fixed at EUR 750.

Show verbatim operative text

The application for a declaration of invalidity is upheld. Registered Community design No 003002286-0001 is declared invalid. The holder bears the applicant’s costs, fixed at EUR 750.

CostsHolder ordered to pay costs of €750

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Joka SAS

France (FR)

Villa Cecilia 292 avenue du Prado, 13008 Marseille, France

Represented by

Legabrand

Patricia Bismuth

Holder · RCD owner

Freedom Mosesvia PDF extraction

IL

22 Mizrahi 19, Tel Aviv 6609522, Israel

Represented by

Caroline Sportes

Prior art cited (3)

Registered RCD

Birkenstock sandal design

RCD No 000169420-0001 · EUIPO designs database · disclosed 2004-10-19

Registered RCD

Birkenstock sandal design

RCD No 000169420-0002 · EUIPO designs database · disclosed 2004-10-19

Web disclosure

MOSES sandal design allegedly marketed since 2014

www.showroompancelet.com · showroompancelet.com

Legal grounds invoked

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

Argument summary

  • The applicant argued that the contested sandal lacked novelty and individual character, relying on the holder's earlier MOSES disclosure and earlier Birkenstock RCDs.
  • The holder invoked the grace period and argued that its slimmer one-piece plastic sandal differed visually and materially from the earlier Birkenstock designs.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of prior RCD 000169420-0001 and found the compared sandals shared the same main visual features, with only minor differences.
  • Given the designer's broad freedom for sandals, the contested design produced the same overall impression on the informed user and lacked individual character.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

02.04

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000132104

vs Shenzhen Damai Network Technology Co., Ltd.

2026-05-21REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000127579

vs VICTORIA CARLOTA TERCEÑO JIMENEZ

2026-04-15REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000131324

vs Song Li

2026-03-11REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130815

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130769

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130811

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130812

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028
000130814

vs CYBROG PTE. LTD.

2026-02-12REUD invalidatedArt 25(1)(b)028