DesignVerdictBeta
← Back to search
Contested design 004117521-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2018-07-26

000010974

Contested design: 004117521-0001

CDR

Outcome

Application rejected (holder wins)

The invalidity application is rejected, and the applicant must bear the holder's costs fixed at EUR 400.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity of registered Community design No 004117521-0001 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

Fatboy the Original B.V.

Netherlands (NL)

De Steenbok 19-21, 5215 MG ’s-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands

Holder · RCD owner

Shenzhen Pingguofeng Technology Co., Ltd.via PDF extraction

China (CN)

Information Bldg, Rm 506, Bldg 10, Qiaonan Jiazhao Garden, Qiaotou Community, Fuyiong St., Bao’an District, Shenzhen, People’s Republic of China

Represented by

A.BRE.MAR. S.R.L.

Prior art cited (2)

Registered RCD

Applicant's earlier 'LAMZAC' chaise longue / inflatable lounger design

RCD No 002621904-0001 · EUIPO designs database; Community Designs Bulletin · disclosed 2015-02-03

Web disclosure⚠ rejected as evidence

Various internet extracts depicting the applicant's 'LAMZAC' design on websites in several countries

various websites

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(b)Article 4(1)Article 5Article 6(1)Article 6(2)Article 7

Argument summary

  • The applicant sought invalidity for lack of novelty and individual character over its earlier LAMZAC RCD, arguing both designs had the same double-tube lounger form and air-scooping concept.
  • The holder filed no observations in reply.
  • The Division accepted disclosure of the earlier RCD through EUIPO publication but rejected the submitted website screenshots as insufficient proof of web disclosure.
  • The Division found the contested design's elevated bulky headrest, double slit, overall shape, and blue-black colour combination created a different overall impression, so the invalidity application failed.

Deciding panel

  • MemberLudmila ČELIŠOVA
  • MemberGailė SAKALAITĖ
  • MemberNatascha GALPERIN

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

06.01

Similar decisions

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

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000107779

vs ANJI WEIYU FURNITURE CO., LTD.

2020-04-03Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000105800

vs Next Retail Limited

2020-04-02Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000108302

vs INTER LINK SAS

2020-01-20Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000101539

vs Soma Group d.o.o.

2019-07-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000101480

vs Soma Group d.o.o.

2019-07-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000101520

vs Soma Group d.o.o.

2019-07-05Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000102339

vs Syzan Sp. z o.o.

2019-04-25Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068
000102859

vs Syzan Sp. z o.o.

2019-04-25Invalidity application rejectedArt 25(1)(b)068